I like to think there’s a bit of a difference between copying something from stackoverflow and not being able to read what you just pasted from stackoverflow.
Sure, you can be lazy and just paste something and trust that it works, but if someone asks you to read that code and know what it’s doing, you should be able to read it. Being able to read code is literally what you’re paid for.
foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 13 hours ago
yes, but it’s way more energy efficient to produce that garbage.
jumping_redditor@sh.itjust.works 12 hours ago
is the garbage per hour higher though?
foenkyfjutschah@programming.dev 9 hours ago
don’t know, i do neither. but i think the time that users take for manual copying and adjusting from a quick web server’s response may level out the time an LLM takes.
Honytawk@lemmy.zip 9 hours ago
I hate that argument.
It is even more energy efficient to write your code on paper. So we should stop using computers entirely. /s
supersquirrel@sopuli.xyz 2 hours ago
Are you aware of a little thing called the climate catastrophe that is unfolding as we speak?
Mniot@programming.dev 5 hours ago
We’re talking here about garbage code that we don’t want. If the choice is “let me commit bad code that causes problems or else I will quit using computers”… is this a dilemma for you?