It’s kind of funny - there’s another thread up where a dev claimed a 20-50x speed up. To their credit they posted videos and links to the repo of their work.

And when you check the work, a large portion of it was hand rolling an ORM (via an LLM). Relatively solved problem that an LLM would excel at, but also not meaningfully moving the needle when you could use an existing library. And likely just creating more debt down the road.

Reminds me of a post I read a few days ago of someone crowing about an LLM writing for them an email format validator. They did not have the LLM code up an accompanying send-an-email-validation loop, and were blithely kept uninformed by the LLM of the scar tissue built up by experience in the industry on how curiously a deep rabbit hole email validation becomes.

If you’ve been around the block and are judicious how you use them, LLM’s are a really amazing productivity boost. For those without that judgement and taste, I’m seeing footguns proliferate and the LLM’s are not warning them when someone steps on the pressure plate that’s about to blow off their foot. I’m hopeful we will this year create better context window-based or recursive guardrails for the coding agents to solve for this.

This is a typical problem you see in autodidacts. They will recreate solutions to solved problems, trip over issues that could have been avoided, and generally do all of things you would expect someone to do if they are working with skill but no experience.

LLMs accelerate this and make it more visible, but they are not the cause. It is almost always a person trying to solve a problem and just not knowing what they don't know because they are learning as they go.

My impression is that LLM users are the kind of people that HATED that their questions on StackOverflow got closed because it was duplicated.

> My impression is that LLM users are the kind of people that HATED that their questions on StackOverflow got closed because it was duplicated.

Lol, who doesn't hate that?

I don't know, in 40 years codding I never had to ask a question there.

So literally everyone in the world? Yeah, seems right!

I would love to see your closed SO questions.

But don't worry, those days are over, the LLMs it is never going to push back on your ideas.

lol, I probably don't have any, actually. If I recall, I would just write comments when my question differed slightly from one already there.

But it's definitely the case that being able to go back and forth quickly with an LLM digging into my exact context, rather than dealing with the kind of judgy humorless attitude that was dominant on SO is hugely refreshing and way more productive!

> [The cause] is almost always a person trying to solve a problem and just not knowing what they don't know because they are learning as they go.

Isn't that what "using an LLM" is supposed to solve in the first place?

1. LLMs can't watch over someone and warn them when they are about to make a mistake

2. LLMs are obsequious

3. Even if LLMs have access to a lot of knowledge they are very bad at contextualizing it and applying it practically

I'm sure you can think of many other reasons as well.

People who are driven to learn new things and to do things are going to use whatever is available to them in order to do it. They are going to get into trouble doing that more often than not, but they aren't going to stop. No is helping the situation by sneering at them -- they are used it to it, anyway.

With the right prompt the LLM will solve it in the first place. But this is an issue of not knowing what you don't know, so it makes it difficult to write the right prompt. One way around this is to spawn more agents with specific tasks, or to have an agent that is ONLY focused on finding patterns/code where you're reinventing the wheel.

I often have one agent/prompt where I build things but then I have another agent/prompt where their only job is to find codesmells, bad patterns, outdated libraries, and make issues or fix these problems.

I am hopeful autodidacts will leverage an LLM world like they did with an Internet search world from a library world from a printed word world. Each stage in that progression compressed the time it took for them to encompass a span of comprehension of a new body of understanding before applying to practice, expanded how much they applied the new understanding to, and deepened their adoption scope of best practices instead of reinventing the wheel.

In this regard, I see LLM's as a way for us to way more efficiently encode, compress, convey and enable operational practice our combined learned experiences. What will be really exciting is watching what happens as LLM's simultaneously draw from and contribute to those learned experiences as we do; we don't need full AGI to sharply realize massive benefits from just rapidly, recursively enabling a new highly dynamic form of our knowledge sphere that drastically shortens the distance from knowledge to deeply-nuanced praxis.

Yeah I love working with Claude Code, I agree that the new models are amazing, but I spend a decent amount of time saying "wait, why are we writing that from scratch, haven't we written a library for that, or don't we have examples of using a third party library for it?".

There is probably some effective way to put this direction into the claude.md, but so far it still seems to do unnecessary reimplementation quite a lot.

It seems to me these days, any code I want to write tries to solve problems that LLMs already excel at. Thankfully my job is perhaps just 10% about coding, and I hope people like you still have some coding tasks that cannot be easily solved by LLMs.

We should not exeggarate the capabilities of LLMs, sure, but let's also not play "don't look up".

I've hand-rolled my own ultra-light ORM because the off-the-shelf ones always do 100 things you don't need.*

And of course the open source ones get abandoned pretty regularly. Type ORM, which a 3rd party vendor used on an app we farmed out to them, mutates/garbles your input array on a multi-line insert. That was a fun one to debug. The issue has been open forever and no one cares. https://github.com/typeorm/typeorm/issues/9058

So yeah, if I ever need an ORM again, I'm probably rolling my own.

*(I know you weren't complaining about the idea of rolling your own ORM, I just wanted to vent about Type ORM. Thanks for listening.)

This is the thing that will be changing the open source and small/medium SaaS world a lot.

Why use a 3rd party dependency that might have features you don't need when you can write a hyper-specific solution in a day with an LLM and then you control the full codebase.

Or why pay €€€ for a SaaS every month when you can replicate the relevant bits yourself?

"And likely just creating more debt down the road"

In the most inflationary era of capabilities we've seen yet, it could be the right move. What's debt when in a matter of months you'll be able to clear it in one shot?

- I cloned a project from GitHub and made some minor modifications.

- I used AI-assisted programming to create a project.

Even if the content is identical, or if the AI is smart enough to replicate the project by itself, the latter can be included on a CV.

I think I would prefer the former if I were reviewing a CV. It at least tells me they understood the code well enough to know where to make their minor tweaks. (I've spent hours reading through a repo to know where to insert/comment out a line to suit my needs.) The second tells me nothing.

Its odd you don't apply the same analysis to each. The latter certainly can provide a similar trail indicating knowledge of the use case and necessary parameters to achieve it. And certainly the former doesnt preclude llm interlocking.

Why do you write like that?

It would help if I had a better understanding of what you mean by "that".

I generally write to liberate my consciousness from isolation. When doing so in a public forum I am generally doing so in response to an assertion. When responding to an assertion I am generally attempting to understand the framing which produced the assertion.

I suppose you may also be speaking to the voice which is emergent. I am not very well read, so you may find my style unconventional or sloppy. I generally try not to labor too much in this regard and hope this will develop as I continue to write.

I am receptive to any feedback you have for me.

I'm sorry that other person spoke to you that way. The vast majority of us aren't like that. I appreciate your comments!

I'd quickly trash your application if I see you just vibe coded some bullshit app. Developing is about working smart, and its not smart to ask AI to code stuff that already exists, its in fact wasteful.

Do people really see a CV and read "computer mommy made me a program" and think it's impressive

Unfortunately, it is happening. I remember an old post on HNs, it mentioned that a "prompt engineer for article generating" can find more jobs than a columnist writer. And op just wrote articles by himself but declared that all artices were generated by AI.

A CV for the disappearing job market as you shovel money into a oligarchy.

Have you ever tried to find software for a specific need? I usually spend hours investigating anything I can find only to discover that all options are bad in one way or another and cover my use case partially at best. It's dreadful, unrewarding work that I always fear. Being able to spent those hours to develop custom solution that has exactly what I need, no more, no less, that I can evolve further as my requirements evolve, all that while enjoying myself, is a godsend.