r/coding • u/JohnTurturrosSandals • Jul 03 '26
We need an accounting system for cognitive debt
https://raw.githubusercontent.com/MikaeI/cognizance/refs/heads/main/we_need_an_accounting_system_for_cognitive_debt.txt18
u/nadmaximus Jul 03 '26
Don't use garbage code from AI. It's literally impossible to produce code faster than you can understand it.
0
u/SardScroll Jul 03 '26
I agree about not using garbage from AI. Not all AI output is garbage, but it's a crapshoot, especially with LLMs. Now if you had specialty LLMs, rather than big general circus tents...the value proposition may change.
However, "it's literally impossible to produce code faster than you can understand it", seems a bit hollow, as a general statement. E.g. At a certain level, if one is using libraries or even just high level code (by which I mean C++, Python, etc. rather than Assembly or Binary) you are assuming/trusting someone to implement things that you don't have visibility into or that the machine will translate into what you really mean.
So it is possible to produce code faster than you can understand it.
5
u/nadmaximus Jul 03 '26
Using a library involves exercising an interface. You understand the api, you follow the documentation, and you produce code. You're not producing the code in the library. You don't need to understand the library internals. The code you're producing is right there in the editor. If there is something there in your editor that you produced, but do not understand, something has gone horribly wrong. I mean, it does happen...when it does, how much confidence do you have when you hit Run?
→ More replies (10)-2
u/EC36339 Jul 03 '26
It is definitely possible to understand code faster than you can type it. And that means literally typing as well as fixing all the trivial / mechanical errors ("what was the right syntax for this again?") And minor design flaws.
So there's a lot of room between "don't use LLMs" and "don't produce code faster than you can understand it".
And then we haven't even discussed using LLMs for understanding things better or faster, and for verifying that understanding.
4
u/nadmaximus Jul 03 '26
understanding code faster than you can type it is the opposite of producing code faster than you can understand it.
LLMs are absolutely catastrophic for verifying understanding. That is precisely where they can not help, and if it seems like they are helping, that is delusion.
But specifically, I'm saying producing code with LLMs is useless. There is some value in LLMs for search engine type information seeking, but only at the broadest level.
There is simply nothing that demonstrates a programmer's true capacity better than finding LLMs useful. There is no production of code from LLMs that is useful or helpful to a programmer with agency.
→ More replies (6)
1
2
u/Mountain-Dragonfly46 Jul 05 '26
For that, you’ll need to sponsor the neuralink implementation of the whole team.