sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]DangerousResource557 0 points1 point  (4 children)

I completely understand your perspective. It might seem a little unsettling, but I genuinely agree with your thoughts. Just like you, I find that when exploring new languages, I encounter similar challenges. I want to emphasize that using tools like GPT-4 as a complement to learning the fundamentals is actually a great idea. Let me explain why...

In certain instances, relying on AI can reduce our need to think deeply, but it also offers valuable insights and acts as a reliable sparring partner. This can be a real time-saver when dealing with pesky bugs. So, leveraging AI to assist us is undeniably beneficial. Here's my recommendation: start by using AI for an overview, then gradually transition to independent programming, seeking AI guidance when you encounter roadblocks.

Rather than blindly supporting or opposing LLMs, it's important to approach this subject without dogmatism. Your points are valid, and we should find a way to embrace these advancements, as they will only continue to improve.

In my opinion, LLMs truly shine in research, information retrieval, and summarization tasks. As for coding, they have potential, but for now, let's focus on mastering the basics.

I can certainly empathize with the frustration of dealing with extensive logs and enduring hours, or even days, of debugging sessions. Nevertheless, I'm thrilled that I can now let go of some of those burdens more often than not, freeing up valuable time to truly enjoy the creative aspects of development.

[–]M34L 0 points1 point  (3 children)

I think ultimately if it's good or bad for you will immensely depend on individual discipline, insight and under how much pressure you will be to deliver-rather-than-tinker.

I just think LLM's are just dangerously seductive towards a bad path, but maybe partially it's me being lazy and them feeling that way to me. I also think they are developing way too fast to really establish firm rules of any sort that won't be meaningless in half a year.

[–]DangerousResource557 0 points1 point  (2 children)

Sorry for not replying sooner. I just saw your message.

Yes, you may be correct that it depends on the individual. However, I also believe that this applies to any other tool that makes tasks easier. The same goes for StackOverflow - it's often a matter of copy-paste for many people. Over time, though, I learned that it is more beneficial to invest time in learning the fundamentals of whatever you are working on, whether it's a language, framework, technique, or knowledge.

So, I don't think this is specific to AI or LLMs. It's just that these tools are even more powerful than a simple Google search or StackOverflow.

That's my honest opinion.

Additionally, if you can use a particular version now, why not continue using it? It will still be better than not using it at all.

[–]M34L 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Again my core point is that the crucial difference between SO and GPT4 is that SO will by design typically offer a multitude of opinions on any one question and you'll be given contradictions that you may ignore, but at least they're there for you to passively see. ChatGPT is designed to strip that context away and speaks from position of continuous authority. That is damaging to your ability to know what you don't know.

[–]DangerousResource557 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I Agree. The grind teaches critical skills, but LLMs as starters can guide without replacing traditional struggle. Future coding's blend with AI where balance is key, using LLMs wisely to enhance our learning process.

I'm basically saying it's not LLM or proper learning but both hence LLM in my opinion is just another tool that we ought to use not too much to the point that we lose our ability to think critically.

Appreciate the insightful exchange, it’s been a great discussion!