Comment on Rabbit R1 AI box revealed to just be an Android app

• Semi-Hemi-Demigod@kbin.social ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  I think the reason they're useful for writing code is that there's a third party - the parser or compiler - that checks their work. I've used LLMs to write code as well, and it didn't always get me something that worked but I was easily able to catch the error.

  source
• TrickDacy@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

  Are they useless?

  Only if you believe most Lemmy commenters. They are convinced you can only use them to write highly shitty and broken code and nothing else.

  source

  • Bahnd@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    This is my expirence with LLMs, I have gotten it to write me code that can at best be used as a scaffold. I personally do not find much use for them as you functionally have to proofread everything they do. All it does change the work load from a creative process to a review process.

    source

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      I don’t agree. Just a couple of days ago I went to write a function to do something sort of confusing to think about. By the name of the function, copilot suggested the entire contents of the function and it worked fine. I consider this removing a bit of drudgery from my day, as this function was a small part of the problem I needed to solve. It actually allowed me to stay more focused on the bigger picture, which I consider the creative part. If I were a painter and my brush suddenly did certain techniques better, I’d feel more able to be creative, not less.

      source

      • FlorianSimon@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        I would argue that there just isn’t much gain in terms of speed of delivery, because you have to proofread the output - not doing it is irresponsible and unprofessional.

        I don’t tend to spend much time on a single function, but I can remember a time recently where I spent two hours writing a single function. I had to mentally run all cases to check that it worked, but I would have had to do it with LLM output anyway. And I feel like reviewing code is just much harder to do right than to write it right.

        In my case, LLMs might have saved some time, but training the complexity muscle has value in itself. It’s pretty formative and there are certain things I would do differently now after going through this. Most notably, in that case: fix my data format upfront to avoid edge cases altogether and save myself some hard thinking.

        I do see the value proposition of IDEs generating things like constructors, and sometimes use such features, but reviewing the output is mentally exhausting, and it’s necessary because even non-LLM sometimes comes out as broken. Assuming that it worked 100% of the time: still not convinced it amounts to much time saved at the end of day.

        source
  • best_username_ever@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

    But we never have proofs that it gives good code, that’s convenient…

    source

    • TrickDacy@lemmy.world ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

      So you want me to go into one of my codebases, remember what came from copilot and then paste it here? Lol no

      source

      • best_username_ever@sh.itjust.works ⁨6⁩ ⁨months⁩ ago

        Of course you can’t.

        source

        • -> View More Comments