undefined

points

[-]

> by solving hard problems you get an insight into the problem-solving process itself, at least in your area of expertise, in a way that you simply don’t if all you do is read other people’s solutions. One consequence of this is that people who have themselves solved difficult problems are likely to be significantly better at using solving problems with the help of AI, just as very good coders are better at vibe coding than not such good coders

Yes but it's not just that if you solved a problem yourself, you're better at solving other problems; it's also that you actually understand the problem that you solved, much better than if you simply read a proof made by somebody (or something) else.

I see this happening in the enterprise. People delegate work to some LLM; work isn't always bad, sometimes it's even acceptable. But it's not their work, and as a result, the author doesn't know or understand it better than anyone else! They don't own it, they can't explain it. They literally have no value whatsoever; they're a passthrough; they're invisible.

by tempaccount50502 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Are you a cutting edge research scientist or something? Everyone I know works in the same domain every day. The problems are the same. People aren't solving brand new problems to humanity every day. We make budgets and look at ticket counts. Roll out patches. Replace hardware. Upgrade software packages. Make a new dashboard to track a project. I guess if every day is a completely novel thing for you, ok. I feel like the goalposts have moved to an absolutely ridiculous place. Oh no, I won't have a bunch of random error log numbers memorized anymore? Who gives a shit. I just want to afford a place to live so I can play my guitar and make something good for dinner. Maybe I'm just old, but I don't see why the average person needs to be a fuckin genius problem solver.

by doginasuit12 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

I don't think it matters much what kind of problem it is. If it is challenging enough to benefit from assistance and you end up playing a minor role in the solution, it seems like you are putting yourself in the worst position possible. You lose your edge for functioning within the problem space and it raises the question why you are even in the loop at all. If its job security you want, transforming your role into LLM babysitter seems like the worst way to ensure it.

by kerabatsos6 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

But perhaps we should regard it as a major achievement.

by lmpdev6 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I mean in the same way getting Wolfram Alpha to solve a really hard/ugly differential equation I suppose

by aspenmartin16 minutes ago|

parent|

[-]

Insane that we have a system capable of making innovative math proofs and people dismiss it as unimpressive

by palata4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

I feel like you slightly miss both points.

> Training must start from the basics though.

Sure, but the point is that at some point (e.g. when starting a PhD) one needs to do research, not learn the basics. And LLMs make that harder, because they solve the "easy research" part.

Take a young lion "fighting/playing" with another young lion as a way to learn how to fight, and later hunt. And suddenly they get TikTok and are not interested in playing anymore. Their first encounter with hunting will be a lot harder, won't it?

> People pay coders to build stuff that they will use to make money and I can happily use an AI to deliver faster and keep being hired.

Again, that's true but missing the point: if you never get to be a "good coder", you will always be a "bad vibe coder". Maybe you can make money out of it, but the point was about becoming good.