Hacker News Reader

Comment by HexDecOctBin | Hacker News Reader

This is a good idea, we should start a blacklist of open-source projects that are known to have used LLMs. There should be two universes of code, one for hand-typed code used by people who care about quality and one for slop used by those making trash.

View on HN

There was plenty of bad code long before LLMs came around. Let’s be real.

Being hand written is no guarantee of high quality, just like using LLMs is no guarantee of low quality.

Using LLMs is not a guarantee of low quality, but it does make low quality vastly more likely.

Eh, not really. It just lowers the barrier for lazy people who never would have tried contributing before.

I’ve read a lot of code hand-written by programmers. By smart and hard working people. And I know from experience that the code the average programmer writes is not great either.

Yeah but that's just bad code in general, no? You can make good code with LLMs, you just have to actually engineer it and give up some of the velocity; which is just a bigger version of the same problem we've always had (yes, I get that code review can't scale).

This is just really silly.

The more I think about this the more I think it's like self-driving cars. We have this expectation that self-driving cars MUST be 101% safe and never get into any accidents, ever, before the technology is worth adopting. LLMs are the same -- it's like we think if you can't one-shot a prompt and get perfect software out of it, it's failed. You can choose to spend time getting the LLM to refine the code it's written, review the architecture, come up with an actual engineering process around the LLM. Yes that means you'll be producing less code per time spent -- which is a good thing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com