Hacker News Reader

My take on this is they are a tool to help speed up your work they are not meant to produce finished work. Humans produce finished work. LLM will never be deterministic cause their entire value is that they are generalizable.

View on HN

I hear that, sort of, but here's the thing. Using AI at scale means AI needs to be nearly perfect about not shitting where they eat. That's the subject matter of the whole thread

So the options are a) being a really aggressive stickler for generative hygiene with deterministic rules, b) being massively wasteful about hiring a few machine janitors for every machine coder, or c) humans become the machine's janitor. If I haven't missed an option.. only the first option seems reasonable here.

"AI at scale" is just a euphemism for slop. Current gen AI can augment human engineers but not outright replace them.

This isn't really responsive to what I'm saying or what the discussion here is about, but if you insist. Would you describe lots of AI augmenting lots of human engineers as perhaps.. AI at scale?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com