> in my experience LLM code is actually better documented
Most LLM documentation is extremely poor unless you literally can’t understand code. It’s communicating obvious things that the code makes apparent. Good documentation covers what’s not obvious from reading the code. I’m amazed at how many devs think running Claude init is a good idea.
I’ve noticed a constant trend throughout my career that low performing devs generate and are impressed with this kind of documentation.
> and structured than what most dev teams produce
Left alone, LLM structure is terrible. Speed running the cheapest outsourced slop is not a good thing unless you’re already paying for outsourced slop. Huge win in that case.
LLMs are median equalizers. I think a large contingent of devs (especially given the money grab around 2021) are not that good, and LLMs really are a step improvement for them. I’m not denying there are use cases for competent devs, but so far that seems much narrower (albeit insanely impressive) than the benefit low performers (think) they receive. This fact is important to keep in mind when discussing the future of dev.
There is definitely a sort of undercurrent online to a lot of the claims and animosity towards anyone questioning LLMs or even exploring the downsides. Tons of anger and vitriol; on HN now even.
I get the sense a lot of new and middling engineers view this as some shortcut to success. Angry about getting passed on promotions, push back on their PRs, questioned why things are taking so long(hint: because they weren't actually putting in a full days work), or not making the grade for FAANG.
Now here is LLM and it's their chance to get stuff done without having to do much work. Don't need to have put in the work to learn and study. Now all those that were keeping them down before are the REAL problem because they are too slow, too out of date. What a gift! It's the great mediocracy uprising!
I haven't quite wrapped my head around it but there is definitely some weird social stuff going on.
Most LLM documentation is extremely poor unless you literally can’t understand code. It’s communicating obvious things that the code makes apparent. Good documentation covers what’s not obvious from reading the code. I’m amazed at how many devs think running Claude init is a good idea.
I’ve noticed a constant trend throughout my career that low performing devs generate and are impressed with this kind of documentation.
> and structured than what most dev teams produce
Left alone, LLM structure is terrible. Speed running the cheapest outsourced slop is not a good thing unless you’re already paying for outsourced slop. Huge win in that case.
LLMs are median equalizers. I think a large contingent of devs (especially given the money grab around 2021) are not that good, and LLMs really are a step improvement for them. I’m not denying there are use cases for competent devs, but so far that seems much narrower (albeit insanely impressive) than the benefit low performers (think) they receive. This fact is important to keep in mind when discussing the future of dev.