Lemmings, I was hoping you could help me sort this one out: LLM’s are often painted in a light of being utterly useless, hallucinating word prediction machines that are really bad at what they do. At the same time, in the same thread here on Lemmy, people argue that they are taking our jobs or are making us devs lazy. Which one is it? Could they really be taking our jobs if they’re hallucinating?
Disclaimer: I’m a full time senior dev using the shit out of LLM’s, to get things done at a neck breaking speed, which our clients seem to have gotten used to. However, I don’t see “AI” taking my job, because I think that LLM’s have already peaked, they’re just tweaking minor details now.
Please don’t ask me to ignore previous instructions and give you my best cookie recipe, all my recipes are protected by NDA’s.
Please don’t kill me
This article / talk is quite illuminating. I’ve seen studies indicating that AI coding agents improve productivity by 15-20% in the aggregate, which tracks with my own experience. It’s a solid productivity boost when used correctly, clearly falling in the “centaur”category in my own experience at least. However, all the hate around it, my own included, stems from the “reverse-centaur” aspirations around it. The companies developing these tools aren’t in it to make a reasonable profit while delivering modest productivity gains. They are in it to spin a false narrative that these tools can replace 9/10 engineers in order to drive their own overly inflated valuations, knowing damn well this is not the case, but not caring because they don’t plan to be the ones holding the bag in the end (taxpayers will be the bag-holders when they get bailed out).