[d_silin]

My radical opinion is that LLMs are harmful for software development - they are the ultimate "goto" operator. All actual code should be written by a human developer.

Instead, use them in adversarial mode - run QA scenarios using LLM agent as a substitute for end user to do bug discovery.

[arm32]

I love how we need to preface such an opinion as being "radical" nowadays.

[antonvs]

> All actual code should be written by a human developer.

This seems arbitrary. Why don’t you say the same thing about machine code? Developers use tools so they can avoid writing machine code. What is causing you to draw a line in the sand about use of tools?

The obvious answer is it’s just a function of the time period you grew up in, and a lack of willingness to adapt to change.

[Archer6621]

This is indeed an important angle to consider as well.

I think there is some nuance though, but it's hard to articulate. I think that is because there are some long term effects that are currently invisible, but that can be anticipated. A lot of it is the human factor, and how changes to how people think and act may ripple through the organizations as well.

Things such as skill atrophy which may reduce not only immediate skills, but also adjacent skills that were maybe important for critical thinking and making good decisions. Or the fact that learning to use an LLM is a skill that is not truly grounded in reality and can therefore not translate well to other areas (you're essentially learning skills within the "reality" of the LLM, based on its weights). That is very different from machine code --> tools, where the tools make explicit assumptions that are based on the workings of the machine code (which is analytical in nature), and where you can, if you wish to, jump in to override those assumptions where needed without having to adapt to a mental model that operates in its own reality (i.e. the LLM's "thought process").

[0xblacklight]

why?