• neukenindekeuken@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    58
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    I mean, yes, absolutely I can. So can my peers. I’ve been doing this for a long, long time, as have my peers.

    The code we produce is many times more readable and maintainable than anything an LLM can produce today.

    That doesn’t mean LLMs are useless, and it also doesn’t mean that we’re irreplaceable. It just means this argument isn’t very effective.

    If you’re comparing an LLM to a Junior developer? Then absolutely. Both produce about the same level of maintainable code.

    But for Senior/Principal level engineers? I mean this without any humble bragging at all: but we run circles around LLMs from the optimization and maintainability standpoint, and it’s not even close.

    This may change in the future, but today it is true (and I use all the latest Claude Code models)

    • SparroHawc@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      ·
      13 hours ago

      The biggest problem with using AI instead of junior developers is that junior developers eventually become senior developers. LLMs … don’t.

        • SparroHawc@lemmy.zip
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          3 hours ago

          It’s more likely than it happening with an LLM, though. Without junior developers the number of future senior devs approaches zero.

          • NotAnonymousAtAal@feddit.org
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 hours ago

            Sorry, my wording was very unclear. I was referring to the LLMs having a small but non-zero chance to actually get good enough to replace senior devs.

            You are right though, chances for the average junior dev to reach senior status are much better than for LLMs to reach that stage any time soon (if ever).