Human coders are still better than LLMs

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by seattle_spring on Thursday May 29, 2025 @08:38PM (#44131701)

This has been my experience as well. The biggest problem is that the answers look plausible, and only after implementation and experimentation do you find them to be wrong. If this happened every once in a while then it wouldn't be a big deal, but I'd guess that more than half of the answers and tutorials I've received through ChatGPT have ended up being plain wrong.

God help us if companies start relying on LLMs for life-or-death stuff like insurance claim decisions.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by dabraham1248 on Thursday May 29, 2025 @09:19PM (#44131899)

I'm not sure if you're being sarcastic, but in case you're not... From https://arstechnica.com/health/2023/11/ai-with-90-error-rate...

"UnitedHealth uses AI model with 90% error rate to deny care, lawsuit alleges" Also "The use of faulty AI is not new for the health care industry."

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:Human coders are still better than LLMs by pwdisswordfishz on Friday May 30, 2025 @04:09AM (#44134046)

> If this happened every once in a while then it wouldn't be a big deal, but I'd guess that more than half of the answers and tutorials I've received through ChatGPT have ended up being plain wrong.

It would actually have been more pernicious that way, since it would lull people into a false sense of security.

[ Parent | on HN ]