This weekly roundup thread is intended for all culture war posts. 'Culture war' is vaguely defined, but it basically means controversial issues that fall along set tribal lines. Arguments over culture war issues generate a lot of heat and little light, and few deeply entrenched people ever change their minds. This thread is for voicing opinions and analyzing the state of the discussion while trying to optimize for light over heat.
Optimistically, we think that engaging with people you disagree with is worth your time, and so is being nice! Pessimistically, there are many dynamics that can lead discussions on Culture War topics to become unproductive. There's a human tendency to divide along tribal lines, praising your ingroup and vilifying your outgroup - and if you think you find it easy to criticize your ingroup, then it may be that your outgroup is not who you think it is. Extremists with opposing positions can feed off each other, highlighting each other's worst points to justify their own angry rhetoric, which becomes in turn a new example of bad behavior for the other side to highlight.
We would like to avoid these negative dynamics. Accordingly, we ask that you do not use this thread for waging the Culture War. Examples of waging the Culture War:
-
Shaming.
-
Attempting to 'build consensus' or enforce ideological conformity.
-
Making sweeping generalizations to vilify a group you dislike.
-
Recruiting for a cause.
-
Posting links that could be summarized as 'Boo outgroup!' Basically, if your content is 'Can you believe what Those People did this week?' then you should either refrain from posting, or do some very patient work to contextualize and/or steel-man the relevant viewpoint.
In general, you should argue to understand, not to win. This thread is not territory to be claimed by one group or another; indeed, the aim is to have many different viewpoints represented here. Thus, we also ask that you follow some guidelines:
-
Speak plainly. Avoid sarcasm and mockery. When disagreeing with someone, state your objections explicitly.
-
Be as precise and charitable as you can. Don't paraphrase unflatteringly.
-
Don't imply that someone said something they did not say, even if you think it follows from what they said.
-
Write like everyone is reading and you want them to be included in the discussion.
On an ad hoc basis, the mods will try to compile a list of the best posts/comments from the previous week, posted in Quality Contribution threads and archived at /r/TheThread. You may nominate a comment for this list by clicking on 'report' at the bottom of the post and typing 'Actually a quality contribution' as the report reason.
Jump in the discussion.
No email address required.
Notes -
You can have the LLM describe the business logic as it's developing and create unit tests to confirm the output is correct and pair that with manual testing as well.
I've created an application with fairly involved business logic using Claude Code and it works really nicely - it simply required using good 'ol fashioned SLDC aka Design, Code, Test, Document.
Is it an enterprise level app with the ability to scale to 10000 concurrent users and SOC2 Authentication and privacy standards? No.... but those types of big applications require multiple teams. If I gave four or five competent software engineers Claude and divided up the work I think you could rebuild a complex application in a lot shorter time.
The idea that you can't use LLMs on business logic is like saying you can't use a car to drive across the country - sure it was true in 1920 but today with the interstate it's easy. Right now it's 1930 or so... but it won't remain 1930 forever.
The LLM will cheat and write test that don't test what they claim to, bypass tests when they fail, write docs that make zero sense, write code that doesn't follow the docs etc.
To be fair humans will do all of these things too. But the code that LLMs write is mind numbingly retarded. If anyone with a modicum of coding experience took a look at your slop app, he would only see an awful, unmaintainable mess. And every AI change you throw at it only increases the debt.
As I said, AI slop is a scissor statement cutting you, the slopmeister, off from everyone else in the world.
OK but that's why you do manual testing... also you can always ask other models to check on the work.
IDK I shared the code with my friend who's a Staff Engineer and he was pretty impressed especially since I've been really diligent about implementing good practices like separation of concerns, test driven development, DRY, determining architecture and reviewing it before implementing etc.
I'm not a moron - I've been a technical PM for 10 years now working on enterprise software and I've had plenty experience reviewing my dev's PRs and doing my own bug investigations as well as evaluating engineering solutions.
This dismissive attitude is only going to get less accurate as time goes on and models improve.
I wonder how long it'll be before "implementing" those practices is as simple as writing a good initial prompt for the coding agent to follow. And how long after that that "do it well" (or nothing at all) would sufficient for it to follow those practices by default.
Remember that LLM capabilities will only improve over time (barring severe government action, at least). Also remember that GPT-3 was released in 2020: Getting all the low-hanging fruit (never mind all the incremental improvements) from a novel technology in six years would be a fantastic achievement, so I don't think we're anywhere close to done.
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link
More options
Context Copy link