Sadly I’m noticing this.

I imagined that, since this is a federated group, people would be more interested in discussing, or at least reading each other’s essay. But looks like I was wrong.

“I can see my code from 3 years ago, was already slop!”

• Myself

Funny how often I can see that people haven’t read a single phrase in the post. And are probably just going by the headings and title.

“NoT eVeYtHiNg Ai Is SlOp”

Did you fully read the blog post? Because your critic is somewhat far from the discussion on the post.

“will you still think I’m cool if I use AI???”

That’s is not the case, and if you read the post I’ll strongly discuss about the usage and quality and how heavy usage decrease quality.

[…] use of Large Language Models makes some entity successful?

I’m assuming this usage of entity as like a company, otherwise I didn’t get the meaning of this phrase.

So, companies will always benefit from automation tools (not limited to LLM), but all automation always improve the “Suplus Value”. In a ideal world this means less work for the same output, but in reality the expectation changes to have even more work on already overworked and badly paid labour.

So, any LLM for success companies… No. I don’t see it. But I understand the meaning behind the usage of automation.

Followup - Who do you think benefits if people don’t use LLM’S?

To be honest, using US model, no. Using chinese models hosted in your own environment, maybe. The problem isn’t just the tool, and looking at the tool just as a tool in the vacuum don’t make a lot of sense. You need to evaluate in context.

This tool stole all the people online (and offline, considering that AI labs are destroying books for that). So, benefits people, no. Be useful, maybe.

Last question at what point does LLM usage for “non-slop outputs” have pros that outweigh the cons as people who are against the use of AI see it?

This is very personal in my view, some people would say that needs to be handcraft, meaning very little automation, some would say that some is fine, while other would accept any slop.

For me (as a coder), when I’ve to change 10 files on the same parts, in the bast I would make a bash script to find the files and update each (when a grep wasn’t enough), today this can be delegated to a LLM, still needs to validate and confirm. But this is me.

My job has recently made AI available to us. The main […]

Kind of feels, and to be honest, once I learned how to better use unix tools, the machine have open to me. I can make easier code, I can link easily my essays, a fair shit ton of stuff got easier when I started to embrace the unix utilities.

I don’t want to build something to a spec I don’t understand […]

Sadly, companies a moving to spec only, no looking in the code, just in the spec. I can already feel the bug storm comming. Reason why I think it’s important to make a distinction between light usage, for a few snippets, some baseline on the contrast of full blind deploy.

And sadly again, a lot of people can’t read the full post.

[…] avoid having humans do any of that work […]

You are stepping to close to the S word, the only word that makes the capitalism fear. So are you sure that you want to pull this topic on this community?

Funny that I’m seeing negative view on this post, and it’s also closer to what I’ve found in the wild. Often (in special outside of the web/rest api world), the LLM fails far more often, like at least 3 in 10 is pure garbage, while the other 7 is maybe correct, but still needs refactor to be in the shape to use in the codebases that I’ve.

[…] latest models are capable of non-slop code and tolerable prose […]

We may disagree on this. It can help, but “good” quality you are stretching the point. I would argue that if you stay in the comments section only, any LLM generated text is “good quality”, but when you look for good writers, and gets familiar with quality essay, LLM isn’t even close to “good”.

[…] Anthropic has a slight edge on code quality […]

As a engineer with some years in my back (enough to have back pain when wake up, if you catch my drift)… The quality level of code is “bad” to “ok-ish”… But far from “good”. When you work in good codebases you can see what an good abstraction is. But the LLM can only produce “ok-ish” at best, and this won’t save the industry.

If this code generation were “good”, we should be surfing in new features for every single product, instead we have more bugs. So I ask the question, did it have a productivity boost?

And I get back to my original question on the post, “Who benefits from this binary view on the topic?”

[…] an additional reviewer […]

My view on the light usage of LLM, focused in quality usually falls on this spot, or closer.

Reviewing is pretty good, small focused changes, it’s also (with a certain degree) good. But forget the code and let it be, this is too far. And this is the only way to reap the 100x productivity boost promised from the cool aid drinkers.

Cool examples, but in the binary view, the result work from this is slop.

And this is the problem that I rise in the post.

Who benefits from the binary view?

And I ask you this, who benefits? Who do you think benefits?

[…] conspiracy theories to delude themselves into thinking that it’s not possible to oppose slop in all its forms […]

Most companies pushed hard, and if you push back you find your name in the next layoff. When you need to choose work or starve, the choice is somewhat obvious.

So it’s not conspiracy, it’s just capitalism. And with this I ask you:

Who benefits from the binary view?

I understand the sentiment. But I want to believe in a better future. Similarly, that when we look into the past we can see the good, and the bad. Think about our lost ability to make long lasting furniture, a person from 1900 could say that we (a person from 2000) we lost the ability to make long lasting furniture. And I think the 2100 will look into us with similar eyes.

Still it’s a good point.

Freaking good article. Super in depth with good explanation and analogy. Thanks for sharing.

You know what would be better? Have the audio files, in flac, or at least high-res mp3 to listen whenever you want, from any device you want, without the need of an Apple account.

Navidrome.

“We’ll heave and haul and roar o’er the dark blue wave!”

I don’t have the data, but while the revenue from this Cambridge case is greater than the 25B, this 25B is just the cost of doing business.

Wouldn’t this be some sign of AI psychosis?

I don’t want to live in this world xD

To be honest, I’m learning how to repurpose all my hardware, even my old android tablets I’m figuring out how to make something useful from it. Even it’s just to have a local hosted Wikipedia.

Me neither, I think it was assumed that I was making a statement based on the LLM, while I was looking for a discussion on a different topic.

If you are willingly fixing the trains at Auschwitz, you are a Nazi engineer, not just an engineer.

Ouch this hurts. On another comment the analogy with religion made me think about it. I am still pondering about to be honest. And I don’t have a good answer.

But the moment you take action in favor of detriment of others, this means something.

If this is the price… Maybe would be nice to have a way to install SteamOS on the console. Or better install any Linux so I can use as a working station and a gaming gig.