←back to thread

467 points 0x63_Problems | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.406s | source
Show context
perrygeo ◴[] No.42138092[source]
> Companies with relatively young, high-quality codebases benefit the most from generative AI tools, while companies with gnarly, legacy codebases will struggle to adopt them. In other words, the penalty for having a ‘high-debt’ codebase is now larger than ever.

This mirrors my experience using LLMs on personal projects. They can provide good advice only to the extent that your project stays within the bounds of well-known patterns. As soon as your codebase gets a little bit "weird" (ie trying to do anything novel and interesting), the model chokes, starts hallucinating, and makes your job considerably harder.

Put another way, LLMs make the easy stuff easier, but royally screws up the hard stuff. The gap does appear to be widening, not shrinking. They work best where we need them the least.

replies(24): >>42138267 #>>42138350 #>>42138403 #>>42138537 #>>42138558 #>>42138582 #>>42138674 #>>42138683 #>>42138690 #>>42138884 #>>42139109 #>>42139189 #>>42140096 #>>42140476 #>>42140626 #>>42140809 #>>42140878 #>>42141658 #>>42141716 #>>42142239 #>>42142373 #>>42143688 #>>42143791 #>>42151146 #
1. jamil7 ◴[] No.42138884[source]
> This mirrors my experience using LLMs on personal projects. They can provide good advice only to the extent that your project stays within the bounds of well-known patterns.

I agree but I find its still a great productivity boost for certain tasks, cutting through the hype and figuring out tasks that are well suited to these tools and prompting optimially has taken me a long time.

replies(1): >>42139011 #
2. pydry ◴[] No.42139011[source]
I hear people say this a lot but invariably the tasks end up being "things you shouldnt be doing".

E.g. pointing the AI at your code and getting it to write unit tests or writing more boilerplate, faster.