Hacker News Reader

Comment by hansmayer | Hacker News Reader

I am not sure what tests LLMs are passing these days. Every day its some other metric of no practical usage. You know we make money by delivering working code and features. What I do know is that for myself and people working for me at my company, we hit the limits of their practical usage so often,not even counting the casual removal of entire parts of code, that we recently decided to revert back from agents to using them again only in the conversational mode and only for select tasks. Whoever claims these tools are revolutionary is clearly not using them intensively enough or does not have a challenging use case. We get it, they can quickly spit out a react app for you, the frontend devs and people who were never good at maths are finally "good" at something vaguely technical. However -try using them for production-ready products over several months every day, your opinion will likely change.

View on HN

>We get it, they can quickly spit out a react app for you, the frontend devs and people who were never good at maths are finally "good" at something vaguely technical

The LLM is better than you at math, too.

https://www.reuters.com/world/asia-pacific/google-clinches-m...

Plenty of us are using LLM/agentic coding in highly regulated production applications. If you're not getting very impressive results in backend and frontend, it's purely a skill issue on your part. "This hammer sucks because I hit my thumb every time!"

Again mate, not relevant. Oh how about this. Show me one major application that was developed mainly with LLMs and that was a huge success by any measure (does not have to be profitability). Again the benchmarks show what benchmarks show, but we have yet to see some killer app done by the LLMs (or mostly LLMs).

You started with insulting someone for using an LLM to write git commit messages, and in order to defend that statement you say that an LLM hasn't written a killer app by itself.

I am not really sure what to say except that if you are simply looking for a way to insult people, just admit you are a mean person and you won't have to justify in ways that make no sense. But if you really only hate LLMs, you can do that in ways that don't involve insulting people. But to be so full of disdain for a technology that it turns you irrational is something that should be a bit concerning.

Insulting, really? I merely made a statement about the nature of their work. That's not an insult. Please re-read and understand, before conflating. Also you fully misunderstood my comments about the LLMs. If I had disdain I would not have dished out thousands of USD for my team to use them. I am merely saying that they are not what the hype-makers would have you believe. Now show me that one killer app that someone successfully vibe-coded? All we see is theoretical bullshit, benchmarks etc. But no real-world a-ha moment.

You just felt like coming into a thread which was bound to be populated by people talking about using LLM for coding to let them know that their work isn't important because they use an LLM.

It seems to me the only reason someone would feel the need to do such a thing is to validate their own experience. If everyone else seems to be finding value in a tool, but you cannot, it must be because everyone else just isn't doing important things with it.

As I said earlier, I would be concerned about such behavior if I found myself doing it.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com