Readit NewsDeleted Comment
One thing that might not be apparent to non-chess players is that an experienced human (particularly a GM or Super-GM) with an engine can often beat the same engine or another engine that lacks human assistance. There are some positions, particularly in closed games where this can become more of a factor. It'll be interesting to see if a similar logic plays out in other fields. I imagine that some companies may be quick to automate away roles to save money, however, if you follow what we've learned about chess, there's likely an opportunity to make a bet (start a company) on AI-assistance outperforming full AI automation in some domains.
This is advanced/cyborg chess in a nutshell (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess)
This is a poor analogy. Magnus Carlsen stays because chess consumers decide to pay for humans even though they are inferior to Stockfish. BigCorp will always pick machine over you if they can.
Companies automate the parts that are commodity. On messy product work (drifting specs, integration, liability), human + AI + good process > AI alone. The machine proposes; the human sets goals, constrains risk, writes/reads tests. That combo ships faster and with fewer costly mistakes than letting an ai free-run.
> Code review becomes your post-game analysis. Magnus reviews his games with engines to learn from their superior analysis. You review LLM code to ensure it's actually correct.
If AI coding assistents really worked like Chess engines, they would review your code, pointing out issues and suggesting improvements.
Yes, chess engines review your games and point out blunders. They also suggest moves you'd never consider. Like when you're analyzing a position and the engine recommends a move that flips the eval from -1.5 to +1.8. Similarly, coding assistants might suggest a solution you'd never considered.
Both teach something new.
I've updated the post title to "Train with coding assistants like Magnus Carlsen trains with chess engines" to focus on the main point: the methodology. Magnus uses chess engines as sparring-partners to improve his game after matches. Same can be done by developers who will use coding assistants to level up their skills.
Thanks for calling this out.