[softwaredoug]

I’m finding it all boils down to cognitive differences.

Some people find code easier to read than the English description. It’s more precise and many experienced devs can scan it and know what’s happening

Many other people can’t read code. Or they find English easier to read than code.

Thats not a knock on anyone. Maybe the latter will rule the world because the former focuses too much on irrelevant details. Or maybe me there are just different types of problems that need differing levels of attention to detail.

[rawling]

Sure, read the English description.

How can you be sure that's what the code the LLM wrote actually does?

[t43562]

The code tells you HOW, the English should be telling you WHY. Both are usually needed IMO. Even a tiny bit of "why" can be extremely helpful to understanding in my experience. I don't want generated AI garbage that merely describes the code - I want the reason the whole thing exists and what was wanted by the person who wrote it.

[embedding-shape]

AKA "Direction", which obviously the LLMs follows, and suck at coming up with by themselves. Humans though, when they have purposeful direction and manages to execute it, ends up creating a (small) beautiful life-changing revolution almost.

[dgroshev]

Some heart surgeons might only be able to explain to the nurses their ideas on how to carry out the surgery, but are they still heart surgeons?

[pythonplayer123]

I wonder how LLMs could be compared to compilers. I personally think the nondeterministic behavior of LLMs are the biggest distinguisher.