logoalt Hacker News

TonyAlicea10today at 5:28 PM3 repliesview on HN

As a tech educator I 100% agree. LLMs are not going to become a "new compiler" where we don't have to worry about the code any more. There's a reason we trust deterministic systems.

I've been worried about this a lot, I even created an agent skill called do-i-understand that's designed for novice devs (and experienced too, because atrophy) where the LLM asks you questions about the PR you're about to submit. I've found it helps a lot: https://github.com/AnthonyPAlicea/skills/blob/main/skills/do...

One way or another, there will be a skill reckoning.


Replies

nonethewisertoday at 6:31 PM

Why do you trust the non-deterministic LLM with your skill?

show 2 replies
chrisjjtoday at 6:12 PM

A deterministic LLM is possible. Would you trust it?

show 3 replies
eatsyourtacostoday at 8:31 PM

It doesn't matter if the LLM is not deterministic.. the OUTPUT of typed code is deterministic in the sense that it can be seen to be type safe, compiled, and run appropriate unit tests on it.

If I use two LLM's to create some chunk of code and they both do it slightly differently but they both compile and pass appropriate tests.. it honestly doesn't matter if the LLM itself is not deterministic in exactly what it's going to output.

I would also argue- doesn't that make sense? You give two human coders the same task and they are also going to come up with slightly different results.

show 1 reply