That's a nice one

Nappucino

Perhaps for the the style or complexity of the code you (and i) are seeing on a regular basis this is true.

I find, for low logical complexity code, it's less about the difficulty of reading it and more about the speed.

I can read significantly quicker than i can type and if the code isn't something i need additional time to reason about then spotting issue with existing code can be quicker than me writing the same code out.

Boilerplate code is a good example of this.

Though, as i said, I've found the point at which that loses it's reliable usefulness is relatively low in the complexity scale.

The specific issue i have with people pushing LLM's as a panacea for boilerplate code is that it's not declarative and is prone to reasonable looking hallucinations , given enough space.

Even boilerplate in large enough amount can be subject to eccentricities of LLM imagination.

Unobvious enough that i had to ask for clarification, but that could just be me.

Here is the equivalent of the other side :

https://www.carexpert.com.au/opinion/the-latest-data-shows-speed-cameras-dont-save-lives

I'm assuming you're looking at the title and that it's from a website called "carexpert" and assuming that it's not entirely unbiased.

As well you should be.

I'm not espousing centrism, i'm expecting some basic citation vetting.

i'd imagine they exist and would be equally if not more suspicious because fiscal benefit tends to bring a higher likelihood of shenanigans.

By "don't work", do you mean the physical camera's are unreliable and malfunction or that they don't work as a measure to reduce speeding and increase safety? both ?

I am pro speed reduction measures, camera's included.

The only argument against them is the one the guy laid out in the op-ed

but this is absolutely not true, they can and will continue to be abused for profit, sometimes to the detriment of safety.

No idea what the numbers looks like but it's greater than zero, i suspect by quite a bit

edit : i fully understand that this link is incredibly bias, i'm posting it to show that instances do exist in general.

https://ww2.motorists.org/blog/6-cities-that-were-caught-shortening-yellow-light-times-for-profit/

These are for red lights rather than speed but the premise i'm getting at is that people will do unsafe things with traffic cameras for profit.

You are absolutely going to need some peer review or corroborating reference for an article produced and published by an organisation who's entire success premise is based on a particular outcome to said article.

That's "A study on how smoking does not cause lung cancer posted on the Marlboro website" levels of suspected bias.

It's probably legit, but it looks suspicious.

A bunch of 10-inch rack minilab stuff.

edit: pic

It’s a revolutionary tool in its infancy, and it’s already very useful on certain tasks.

That's a bold and premature statement IMO, how many AI winters have there been before this one ?

I'm not even saying you're wrong, but to assert it with such confidence sounds like crypto bro-nanigans.

i would argue that it's evolutionary rather than revolutionary, but that's subjective i suppose.

I’ll never understand the LLM hate on lemmy.

Speaking for me personally i don't hate LLM's, i dislike the confidence with which they are being pushed and the lack of acknowledgement of their very real and IMO very important limitations.

You get statements like

"And most devs I know use it everyday"

Without context, and that feeds into the general propaganda feel of the sentiment, because people who don't actually use them or don't understand the implied context hear "LLM's can do all the things, all the professional devs are using it all day".

I understand it's not on you to police peoples impressions, but trying to add actual context to those statements isn't hate, it's prudence.

Then again, that's subjective too.

It's much faster to check code for correctness than it is to write it in the first place.

In certain circumstances sure, but at any level of complexity, not so much.

At some point it becomes less about code correctness and more about logical correctness, which requires contextual domain understanding.

Want to churn out directory changing python scripts, go nuts.

Want to add business logic that isn't a single discrete change to an existing system, less likely.

For small things is works OK, it's less useful the more complex the task.

That's a deep cut and I am here for it