For example, someone may ask an LLM to write a simple http web server, and it can do that fine, and they consider that complex, when in reality its really not.
This is an extremely false statement.
There also seem to be people hearing big names like Karpathy and Linus Torvalds say they are vibe coding on their hobby projects, meaning who knows what, and misunderstanding this as being an endorsement of "magic genie" creation of professional quality software.
Results of course also vary according to how well what you are asking the AI to do matches what it was trained on. Despite sometimes feeling like it, it is not a magic genie - it is a predictor that is essentially trying to best match your input prompt (maybe a program specification) to pieces of what it was trained on. If there is no good match, then it'll have a go anyway, and this is where things tend to fall apart.
You have to pick people with nothing to gain. https://x.com/rough__sea/status/2013280952370573666
I hold a result of AI in front of your face and they still proclaim it’s garbage and everything else is fraudulent.
Let’s be clear. You’re arguing against a fantasy. Nobody even proponents of AI claims that AI is as good as humans. Nowhere near it. But they are good enough for pair programming. That is indisputable. Yet we have tons of people like you who stare at reality and deny it and call it fraudulent.
Examine the lay of the land if that many people are so divided it really means both perspectives are correct in a way.
You don't have to be bad at coding to use LLMs. The argument was specifically about thinking that LLMS can be great at accomplishing complex tasks (which they are not)
His tweets were getting ~40k views average. He made his big proclamation about AI and boom viral 7 million
This is happening over, and over, and over again
I'm not saying he's making shit up but you're naive if you don't think they're slightly tempted by the clear reaction this content gets
