Hacker News Reader

Comment by fhdsgbbcaA | Hacker News Reader

That just means the bugs are so subtle you haven’t found them yet, they are there and unspooling the damage may be very painful.

View on HN

That's rather assuming of you, they're there no less than they would be for a human's programming - and VERY likely no more.

But one is trying to write good-enough code. The other is trying to write good-enough-looking code. The probability of pain arising from the bugs of the latter is probably greater.

I'd actually love to see a benchmark on this - we're just speculating now.

The work demonstrating the Frankfurtian Bullshit nature of generated prose would suggest as much, given the architecture is the same for code outputs it seems like a fair assumption until it is demonstrated otherwise.

> they're there no less than they would be for a human's programming - and VERY likely no more.

This is VERY different from my own experience. The bugs introduced by the code I’ve tried to generate via LLMs (Mostly Claude, some GPT-4o and o1-preview, and lots of one-off fiddling with local models to see if they’re any better/worse than commercial products) are considerably more numerous (and often more subtle) than what my fellow engineers—juniors included—tend to introduce.

I /want/ these tools to be useful; they haven’t been so far though and I’m kinda stuck on understanding if I’m just not using ‘em right or if they’re even capable of what I want to do. Like I said in a previous comment; I don’t know if I’m being gaslit or if I’m being naive but it feels a lot more like gaslighting.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com