I believe you are mistaken - I’m speaking about LLMs within the context of FOSS and coding as that’s the subject of OP’s post and the article they linked to. You may have thoughts about LLMs in general, but you don’t seem to be addressing their use (and abuse) when it comes to coding or giving them carte blanche when it comes access to FOSS repos. Because if you, as the article suggests, just bend over, you’re giving access to all LLMs, not just some hypothetical specially trained one.
Yeah my response was directly for your statement that there are no real and tangible benefits of llms. I think how useful llms may or may not be is immaterial when it comes to the repos and they will be used in coding. Wikipedia went a good direction and worked out a deal for them to contribute back and linus was sensible in his response to usage for coding.
“AI coding assistants feel productive because they give instant feedback. You type a prompt and code drops in right away. That loop feels like progress, the same reward you get from closing a ticket or fixing a failing test. The problem is that dopamine rewards activity in the editor, not working code in production.”
regardless of if the feedback is from the ai or a blog example its up to the programmer to evaluate the relative value of what they are looking at. No one codes from nothing for things they have not done before and even then they are likely to start with code they wrote before and start editing. Also ai assitance for coding is not limited to coding. I found ai commenting to be useful as I am more likely to correct an ai’s comment as I go than comment as I code. Its very easy to be like. I will get the commenting in later but when you see something you don’t like, at least for me, then I don’t like to leave it there.
I believe you are mistaken - I’m speaking about LLMs within the context of FOSS and coding as that’s the subject of OP’s post and the article they linked to. You may have thoughts about LLMs in general, but you don’t seem to be addressing their use (and abuse) when it comes to coding or giving them carte blanche when it comes access to FOSS repos. Because if you, as the article suggests, just bend over, you’re giving access to all LLMs, not just some hypothetical specially trained one.
Yeah my response was directly for your statement that there are no real and tangible benefits of llms. I think how useful llms may or may not be is immaterial when it comes to the repos and they will be used in coding. Wikipedia went a good direction and worked out a deal for them to contribute back and linus was sensible in his response to usage for coding.
“AI coding assistants feel productive because they give instant feedback. You type a prompt and code drops in right away. That loop feels like progress, the same reward you get from closing a ticket or fixing a failing test. The problem is that dopamine rewards activity in the editor, not working code in production.”
https://www.cerbos.dev/blog/productivity-paradox-of-ai-coding-assistants
regardless of if the feedback is from the ai or a blog example its up to the programmer to evaluate the relative value of what they are looking at. No one codes from nothing for things they have not done before and even then they are likely to start with code they wrote before and start editing. Also ai assitance for coding is not limited to coding. I found ai commenting to be useful as I am more likely to correct an ai’s comment as I go than comment as I code. Its very easy to be like. I will get the commenting in later but when you see something you don’t like, at least for me, then I don’t like to leave it there.