https://nmn.gl/blog/ai-illiterate-programmers
Relevant quote
Every time we let AI solve a problem we could’ve solved ourselves, we’re trading long-term understanding for short-term productivity. We’re optimizing for today’s commit at the cost of tomorrow’s ability.
I like the sentiment of the article; however this quote really rubs me the wrong way:
I’m not suggesting we abandon AI tools—that ship has sailed.
Why would that ship have sailed? No one is forcing you to use an LLM. If, as the article supposes, using an LLM is detrimental, and it’s possible to start having days where you don’t use an LLM, then what’s stopping you from increasing the frequency of those days until you’re not using an LLM at all?
I personally don’t interact with any LLMs, neither at work or at home, and I don’t have any issue getting work done. Yeah there was a decently long ramp-up period — maybe about 6 months — when I started on ny current project at work where it was more learning than doing; but now I feel like I know the codebase well enough to approach any problem I come up against. I’ve even debugged USB driver stuff, and, while it took a lot of research and reading USB specs, I was able to figure it out without any input from an LLM.
Maybe it’s just because I’ve never bought into the hype; I just don’t see how people have such a high respect for LLMs. I’m of the opinion that using an LLM has potential only as a truly last resort — and even then will likely not be useful.
Why would that ship have sailed?
Because the tools are here and not going anyway
then what’s stopping you from increasing the frequency of those days until you’re not using an LLM at all?
The actually useful shit LLMs can do. Their point is that using only majorly an LLM hurts you, this does not make it an invalid tool in moderation
You seem to think of an LLM only as something you can ask questions to, this is one of their worst capabilities and far from the only thing they do
Because the tools are here and not going anyway
Swiss army knives have had awls for ages. I’ve never used one. The fact that the tool exists doesn’t mean that anybody has to use it.
The actually useful shit LLMs can do
Which is?
The actually useful shit LLMs can do
Which is?
Waste energy and pollute the environment? I can relate… not useful, tho
This guy’s solution to becoming crappier over time is “I’ll drink every day, but abstain one day a week”.
I’m not convinced that “that ship has sailed” as he puts it.
Hey that sounds exactly like what the last company I worked at did for every single project 🙃
“Every time we use a lever to lift a stone, we’re trading long term strength for short term productivity. We’re optimizing for today’s pyramid at the cost of tomorrow’s ability.”
“If my grandma had wheels she would be a bicycle. We are optimizing today’s grandmas at the sacrifice of tomorrow’s eco friendly transportation.”
Yeah fake. No way you can get 90%+ using chatGPT without understanding code. LLMs barf out so much nonsense when it comes to code. You have to correct it frequently to make it spit out working code.
If we’re talking about freshman CS 101, where every assignment is the same year-over-year and it’s all machine graded, yes, 90% is definitely possible because an LLM can essentially act as a database of all problems and all solutions. A grad student TA can probably see through his “explanations”, but they’re probably tired from their endless stack of work, so why bother?
If we’re talking about a 400 level CS class, this kid’s screwed and even someone who’s mastered the fundamentals will struggle through advanced algorithms and reconciling math ideas with hands-on-keyboard software.
- Ask ChatGPT for a solution.
- Try to run the solution. It doesn’t work.
- Post the solution online as something you wrote all on your own, and ask people what’s wrong with it.
- Copy-paste the fixed-by-actual-human solution from the replies.
deleted by creator
If there’s no code completion, I can tell you even people who’s been doing coding as a job for years aren’t going to write it correctly from memory. Because we’re not being paid to memorize this shit, we’re being paid to solve problems optimally.
Why would you sign up to college to willfully learn nothing
deserved to fail
Probably promoted to middle management instead
He should be grateful. I hear programming interviews are pretty similar, as in the employer provides the code, and will pretty much watch you work it in some cases. Rather be embarrassed now than interview time. I’m honestly impressed he went the entire time memorizing the code enough to be able to explain it, and picked up nada.
I’m honestly impressed he went the entire time memorizing the code enough to be able to explain it, and picked up nada.
Or he asked the LLM to summarise it and memorised that.
This person is LARPing as a CS major on 4chan
It’s not possible to write functional code without understanding it, even with ChatGPT’s help.
U underestimate the power of the darkside, how powerful ctrl+c ctrl+v is young padawan
If you copy and paste from ChatGPT your code won’t compile.
You need to know what the peices of code do and how to peice them together to make it work.
Which is kind of impossible to do without understanding it
Since version 4 it has no problem generating working code. The question is how complex the code can get etc. But currently with o1 (o3 mini perhaps a bit less) a dozen functions with 1000 lines of code are really possible without a flaw.
If I tell ChatGPT “write me a program in python that does X, Y, and Z” it will not output code that can be compiled or ran without editing
isn’t it kinda dumb to have coding exams that aren’t open book? if you don’t understand the material, on a well-designed test you’ll run out of time even with access to the entire internet
when in the hell would you ever be coding IRL without access to language documentation and the internet? isn’t the point of a class to prepare you for actual coding you’ll be doing in the future?
disclaimer did not major in CS. but did have a lot of open book tests—failed when I should have failed because I didn’t study enough, and passed when I should have passed because the familiarity with the material is what allows you to find your references fast enough to complete the test
I mean, I don’t know how to code but I imagine it’s the same as with other subjects. like not being able to use a calculator during some math tests. The point of the examination is for you to demonstrate you know and understand the concepts. It’s not for you to be tested in the same way you would be in the real world.
