Post

“That anyone uses LLMs to code is a testament to just how bad tooling and languages are.” geohot.github.io//blog/jekyll...

It’s like with tax software—makers of tax software have an interest in making tax laws overly and needlessly complex. Makers of “coding LLMs” have an interest in making it impossible to write code manually.

I think this is right. Dave Winer is a weird crank with some holes in his thinking/ knowledge but he was clearly right that SOAP was deliberately invented to need complex tools in a way that XML-RPC didn't, for example. And with all the Power-BI etc bollocks Microsoft has conspicuously failed to

do a Visual Basic for Cloud. Like, at the appropriate points in history it was easy to use say Turpo Pascal or Fortran (DOS era) or VB3 (16 bit Windows) or VB6 (32 bit) to do adequate apps if you knew what you were doing ,but there isn't really a current equivalent for the cloud (with early web

If there is one constant in human development… it’s passing off a task to ‘technology’ and then forgetting the skill required to complete that task without the technology.

So I've always told people who asked me what the most important skill or knowledge for programming is to understand how a computer actually works, literally down to transistors. Interestingly enough, this is impossible to do for LLMs—they're simply a black box by design.

This is why I think "AI" is not like any other technology ever made—and inherently problematic as we can't understand it (not "it's difficult" or "it's hard" but it's "it's impossible to understand").