[dan_gee]

A resolute anti-AI perspective is a breath of fresh air compared to the middle-of-the-road "AI made me 10x more productive BUT"-style comments.

My professional opinion is that LLM technology doesn't work very well for software development and I'm not interested in hemming and hawing over its supposed benefits any longer.

[rpdillon]

Talking with a friend of mine who's been in development for some time and I had been talking a little bit about the skill required to wield AI effectively and that people were expecting it to be something that required less skill than it does.

He said his version of this observation is "your agents are only as good as you are." I think he's right, and the key is to practice and build the skill.

[twister2920]

> agents are only as good as you are

that doesn't sound like a net benefit at all. I think mostly people just enjoy playing with these toys, and good developers are still good with them, bad developers still bad

[rpdillon]

I think there is a distinction between whether or not they require skill and whether or not they are a net benefit.

[anthonyrstevens]

>> LLM technology doesn't work very well for software development

This comment is so obviously false (in my experience) I'm wondering what sort of niche environment you're working in

[dan_gee]

Just my personal experience. I'm not really interested in giving up more personal details in this forum, apologies for that.

[kingstnap]

I'm generally pretty accepting of trust me bro style arguments where we some claims presented without evidence. Especially for AI, sure some model just rm -rf ed your home directy bro sounds bad. It works fine for online discourse.

This is less agreeable. You kind of just made statements without even having claims (even without requirement of evidence or details) to back them up.

This is like the illusion of contribution.

[twister2920]

this whole argument is illusory. nobody is arguing in good faith based on repeatable experiments. this debate is 100% based on how this technology makes one feel, and whether one is speculating for or against future economic returns from the technology

[satvikpendem]

As I mentioned in this thread the other day, it's not worth debating AI skeptics anymore in 2026, with step changes like Fable and Sol. Maybe it was the case in 2025 and before but the field has improved rapidly that it doesn't make sense to listen to people with AI experiences prior to that who haven't touched it since. Does AI make mistakes, sure, but increasingly fewer.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49051369

[dan_gee]

> As I mentioned in this thread the other day, it's not worth debating AI skeptics anymore in 2026

This is pretty rude!

[satvikpendem]

Well that's my personal opinion. You might have a different one but I largely found it to be a waste of my own time, because it's just based on personal experiences.

[what]

I swear I’ve seen this exact same thing said every few months for the last couple of years. You’ll keep repeating it when the next model is released too.

[bigstrat2003]

My dude. People like you have been making this same claim for literally years now. We've been getting it for every single model that came out ever since 2023. It's never yet been true. Don't act like it's the fault of your interlocutors when they are skeptical of a claim you make, instead pay attention to the fact that you are following up many people who falsely claimed the same thing. It's perfectly rational to be skeptical under those conditions.

[satvikpendem]

I don't know about "people like me" but I personally only felt the change myself in early 2026, before that I was like many people quite skeptical. Hence why I have the opinion I do, if it could change my mind I'm sure others could too. And anyway the state of affairs is not the same as 2023 so it always bears repeating one's experiences with the topic every year for an actually accurate assessment. Otherwise it's just he said she said as we're engaging in right now.

[whateveracct]

remember, how useful LLMs are is inversely proportional to your skills.

i have yet to have an LLM beat me. i am forced to try regularly so i don't look like an AI anti at a company that is very much SV pilled

[Barbing]

I don’t think people like Linus Torvalds or Stephen Wolfram feel like language models beat them, just they’ve managed to find specific cases where flawed brainless workhorses serve their needs.

[sjsdaiuasgdia]

Like so many things in life, It Depends (tm).

Some developers work better with LLMs in their workflows than others. Some problems are easier for LLMs to generate a reasonable solution for than others. Some folks prompt minimally and see what the vibes bring. Others start with a detailed architecture and implementation plan.

The individual results will depend quite a lot on the person, the problem, and the approach. It's not a guaranteed winning formula for everyone.