With every technological leap we have pushback, it's natural.
I'm sure people complained that hammers were a useless invention and why would anyone not want to keep using rocks.
Readit Newscalrain commented on GPTs and Feeling Left Behind whynothugo.nl/journal/202... · Posted by u/Bogdanp
> LLM for a complex piece of software far beyond what you have time for, you see the benefits.
Are LLMs the new Agile/Scrum?
"Once you really learn Scrum, it will solve all world problems and clean your house? Your experience is totally different? Skill issue. Try again."
I get your position and don't want to sound dismissive either, however I want to point out that in the only recent study actually trying to measure the productivity gains of LLMs it was observed that there is an actual 19% reduction of gains for experienced developers when using an LLM.
https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...
I asked an LLM to tell me why it "thinks" you observe an increase of productivity while studies show that for experienced developers it's a decrease, and it came up with the following "ideas":
"LLMs Fill Gaps in Knowledge Instantly. Junior developers often face friction from:
- Unfamiliar syntax
- Unclear documentation
- Uncertainty about best practices"
Again, I don't want to sound dismissive, but have you considered that instead of people not seeing the gains you are talking about due to a skills issue with how to fine prompt LLMs, that it's you seeing gains you wouldn't otherwise had you been more skillful?
If knowledge and experience isn't an issue, then LLMs will benefit the programmer less in that space, but are still useful for doing mundane activities you avoid doing, like pivoting an early idea about an API pathing strategy, and have the LLM do the test case pivot for you.
If knowledge and experience in the language is an issue, then LLMs have increased value as they can teach you language notation as well as do the mundane stuff.
If understanding good programming architecture / patterns is an issue, then you have to be more careful with the LLM as you are listening to advice from something that doesn't understand what you really want.
If understanding how to guide an LLM is an issue, then you have to work, test, and design ways of building guidelines and practices that get the outcomes you want.
Using LLMs to code isn't some cheat-code to success, but it does help greatly with the mundane parts of code if you know how to program, and program well.
How much of a large project is truly innovation? Almost every application has boilerplate code wrapped around it, error handling, CRUD endpoints, Web UI flows, all stuff you have to do and not really the fun stuff at the core of your project.
This is where I find LLMs shine, they help you burn through the boring stuff so you can focus more on what really delivers value.
For me the responses just seem a lot more terse?
Very much so, not sure why, but if it has a limited context history of the conversation, the tone may feel off.
It feels physically jarring when it loses the plot with a conversation, like talking to someone who wasn't listening.
I'm sure its a tuning thing, I hope they fix it soon.
calrain commented on GPTs and Feeling Left Behind whynothugo.nl/journal/202... · Posted by u/Bogdanp
So you're taking an easy task, formal logic, and replacing it with a more difficult and time consuming task, babysitting a random number generator. How is that a net-positive?
I get your position, and I don't want to sound dismissive, but when you really learn how to manage an LLM for a complex piece of software far beyond what you have time for, you see the benefits.
Try
calrain commented on GPTs and Feeling Left Behind whynothugo.nl/journal/202... · Posted by u/Bogdanp
Well, it takes a while to learn Vim and then get value from it.
It also takes a while to learn using an LLM and get value from it.
The keys are how to build prompts, ways of working, and guidelines that help the AI stay focused.
You end up spending much more time guiding and coaching rather than coding, that can take a while to get used to.
Eventually though, you will master it and be able to write secure, fast code far beyond what you could have done by yourself.
Note: Also, prep yourself for incoming hate every time you make claims like that! If you write bad code, it's your fault. If your LLM writes bad code, you're a moron! hah
I'm having some unique problems with GPT-5 that I've not seen with GPT-4.
It seems to lose the thread of the conversation quite abruptly, not really knowing how to answer the next comment in a thread of comments.
It's like there is some context cleanup process going on and it's not summarizing the highlights of the conversation to that point.
If that is so, then it seems to also have a very small context, because it seems to happen regularly.
Asking it to 'Please review the recent conversation before continuing' prompt seems to help it a bit.
Calling what vibe coding, though? If you're reviewing, understanding, and testing everything that the coding assistant outputs, then you aren't vibe coding.
If you're just letting the coding assistant do its thing, uncritically, and committing whatever results, then you're vibe coding.
It sounds like you're not vibe coding. That's good. No need to throw away a useful term (even if it's a weird, gen-Z sounding term) that describes a particular (poor) way to use a LLM.
Yeah, maybe you're right.
The point that I'm probably missing (and others) is that we associate the phrase 'Vibe Coding' with 'Using an LLM to help with coding' and they're not the same.
Maybe the critics of Vibe Coding need to remember that all users of LLMs for coding support aren't about to regret their life choices.
Lets stop calling it Vibe Coding.
I'm a heavy user of Claude Code and I use it like a coding assistant.
How well you can manage a development team in real life has strong correlations on how much value you get out of an LLM based coding assistant.
If you can't describe what success looks like, expect people to read your mind, and get angry at validating questions, then you will have problems both with coding assistants and leading teams of developers.
I'd like to introduce more fields or flags to control the behavior as params, not asking user to change the whole base url for single new API.
When an API commits to /v1 it doesn't mean it will deprecate /v1 when /v2 or /v3 come out, it just means we're committing to supporting older URI strategies and responses.
/v2 and /v3 give you that flexibility to improve without affecting existing customers.