News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dawnerd on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @05:47PM (#48214631)
Yet it still codes like a junior developer that memorized all of stack overflow.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by raincole on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @05:51PM (#48214691)
PhDs code like that too. Especially if they're statisticians :)
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dilap on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @05:51PM (#48214684)
Personally I don't find this to be true anymore! It's not always great and does still will often tend towards unneeded complexity (especially if not pushed a bit), but I often find GPT 5.5 writing code I would have written myself. This was very much not true with earlier models (who make something that worked, but I'd always have to rewrite to make it "good code").
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dawnerd on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @09:25PM (#48216652)
Personally I found 5.5 a massive step back from 5.4. Both of them still use way too many fallbacks and unnecessary checks, especially if you're having it output php. It's fine if you're just one person and checking everything and able to catch and correct. But it's really bad when you have a team all using it, not checking the output and trusting it's output leading to spaghetti code. Technically works, but very messy and will no doubt lead to buggy code.

It still writes like a junior dev, in that despite AI being able to get a picture of an entire repo, it's changes are typically confined to the task it's working on and will opt to duplicate logic to keep changes contained. Again, technically works, not ideal.

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dilap on Thursday May 21, 2026 @12:16AM (#48217802)
Yeah, it has a tendency to default to "smallest local hack that will work" and code as defensively as possible.

BUT I have had great success using AGENTS.md and becoming better at prompting to get it to not be like this.

Basic approach in AGENTS.md: don't code defensively, yada yada, we have a validation layer at X, no need to check for anything behind that layer. Works well.

An approach I've found helpful when prompting: What would be the best architecture for this change? If you say "do X" it'll tend to just do the hackiest, shortest path thing. If you say, "what's the best way to do X?" it will think more holistically.

That said, who knows, maybe when it's PHP it just really wants to hack ;-)

(Also, yes, you still need to review the code -- it will still do stupid things, so you can't just be pure hands off w/o ending up with quality degredations. The same is true of humans too though in my experience...)

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by esikich on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @10:23PM (#48217045)
Idk man, I think at this point, if you can't get good code out of frontier models, you're doing something wrong. Plenty of resources out there for you to familiarize yourself with the workflows if you can be bothered.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by _zoltan_ on Thursday May 21, 2026 @05:36AM (#48220032)
100%. this is what I tell people who fail at using these models. the model isn't the problem anymore.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by zulban on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @06:07PM (#48214889)
Clearly you've never supervised junior developers.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by jldugger on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @07:49PM (#48215944)
Or PhDs
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dawnerd on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @09:19PM (#48216605)
That's literally my job...
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by Supermancho on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @10:30PM (#48217102)
>That's literally my job...

Since you’re not in a unique position, I can confidently state that your comparison of LLMs to jr developers seems unfounded. Today, LLMs produce code that is superior to junior developer code by an order of magnitude.

Notably, they demonstrate consistent syntax, clear separation of concerns, strong test coverage, organizational rigor, idiomatic API usage, and the ability to generate and maintain documentation, among other measurable qualities.

LLMs generally operate at a staff engineer level for a number of languages and ecosystems (including polyglot projects).

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by bigstrat2003 on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @11:21PM (#48217470)
LLMs absolutely do not exceed the abilities of junior devs. They don't even meet that bar, let alone exceed it. Junior devs are capable of getting syntax right without someone going "hey you messed that up". LLMs are not. Junior devs get basic logic right. LLMs do not.

Comparing an LLM to a senior developer is an absolute joke.

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by no-name-here on Thursday May 21, 2026 @01:10AM (#48218138)
1. Which LLM are you using that is “not capable of getting syntax right”?

2. Are you referring to without having a compiler or LSP check it? Although even then, the recent LLMs I've used still frequently get syntax right, whereas I'd expect juniors are often using a LSP or compiler to catch mistakes while writing code?

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by cleaning on Thursday May 21, 2026 @04:00AM (#48219326)
What model are you using? Llama 3.1 8b? This has not been true for years.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by frozenseven on Thursday May 21, 2026 @06:01AM (#48220191)
Well, in another comment he said that LLMs haven't improved in 3 years. So this puts him at Llama 1 7B.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by _zoltan_ on Thursday May 21, 2026 @05:38AM (#48220040)
they 100% exceed even medior developers.

who cares about syntax? who cares about iteration? what I care about are _results_, which they can produce at the end. do you check your human colleagues how many iterations they do before committing/showing their work to anybody? no. why should you set such a bar then for your LLM?

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dclowd9901 on Thursday May 21, 2026 @01:27AM (#48218261)
I'm not sure what your background is, but as a staff level engineer, I can assure you they do not. They in fact seem to lack any understanding of architectural intent within a sufficiently large code base. This seems obvious since they can't fit the entire code base in their context at once.

We have many folks (not engineers) at our company using LLMs to open PRs, and every one of these PRs has profound architectural design problems.

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by Supermancho on Thursday May 21, 2026 @08:56AM (#48221895)
> They in fact seem to lack any understanding of architectural intent within a sufficiently large code base. This seems obvious since they can't fit the entire code base in their context at once.

This is a critique of scale, moving the goalpost.

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by dclowd9901 on Friday May 22, 2026 @12:35AM (#48231977)
Nonsense. The goalpost is "this is as good as a senior engineer". A senior engineer can easily understand architectural rationale. Don't dismiss my argument because it's inconvenient to yours.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by bdamm on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @08:37PM (#48216288)
Even if the code was like that (it isn't), the power of the current crop of models to analyze data for patterns and build context out of code is leaps and bounds what it was even a year ago. And any developer will tell you that the hardest part of fixing a bug is knowing where the bug is in the first place. Once you know where it is, fixing it is usually trivial.

There is serious magic happening in the construction of model context.

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by fourseventy on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @10:45PM (#48217212)
What is the last model you used... lol. Linus Torvalds himself said the newest models are better than him at coding.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by stemchar on Wednesday May 20, 2026 @11:36PM (#48217574)
This doesn't sound correct. Source?
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by no-name-here on Thursday May 21, 2026 @01:06AM (#48218105)
In recent months, Linus said it specifically about code for a personal side project of his. The quote was in the commit message. (I’m not the grandparent commenter, and I think grandparent commenter’s claims may be too broad or require context.)
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by yrds96 on Thursday May 21, 2026 @03:24AM (#48219073)
There are a missing the context: The vibecoded application was written in python while the main code was written manually in C by Torvalds in this side project. He never ever said that AI produces better code than him in the language where he is proficientI.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by helloplanets on Thursday May 21, 2026 @03:41AM (#48219178)
https://github.com/torvalds/AudioNoise

> The python visualizer tool has been basically written by vibe-coding. I know more about analog filters -- and that's not saying much -- than I do about python. It started out as my typical "google and do the monkey-see-monkey-do" kind of programming, but then I cut out the middle-man -- me -- and just used Google Antigravity to do the audio sample visualizer.

Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by _zoltan_ on Thursday May 21, 2026 @05:36AM (#48220030)
this is not true at all. I'm using Opus and it's great at very complex problems.
Re:An OpenAI model has disproved a central conjecture in dis... by RedCinnabar on Thursday May 21, 2026 @08:13AM (#48221385)
Not true anymore since like early 2025 and especially since last December.