True, in many cases I’m still searching around because the explanations from humans aren’t as simplified as the LLM. I’ll often have to be precise in my prompting to get the answers I want which one can’t be if they don’t know what to ask.
And that’s how you learn, and learning includes knowing how to check if the info you’re getting is correct.
LLM confidently gives you easy to digest bite, which is plain wrong 40 to 60% of the time, and even if you’re lucky it will be worse for you.
I’m in the kiddie pool, so I do look things up or ask what stuff does. Even though I looked at the man page for printf (printf.3 I believe), there was nothing about %*s for example, and searching for these things outside of asking LLM’s is some times too hard to filter down to the correct answer. I’m on 2 lines of code per hour, so I’m not exactly rushing.
Shell scripting is quite annoying to be sure. Thinking of learning python instead.
In my experience plain old googling still better.
I wonder if AI got better or if Google results got worse.
Bit of the first, lots of the second.
True, in many cases I’m still searching around because the explanations from humans aren’t as simplified as the LLM. I’ll often have to be precise in my prompting to get the answers I want which one can’t be if they don’t know what to ask.
And that’s how you learn, and learning includes knowing how to check if the info you’re getting is correct.
LLM confidently gives you easy to digest bite, which is plain wrong 40 to 60% of the time, and even if you’re lucky it will be worse for you.
I’m in the kiddie pool, so I do look things up or ask what stuff does. Even though I looked at the man page for printf (printf.3 I believe), there was nothing about %*s for example, and searching for these things outside of asking LLM’s is some times too hard to filter down to the correct answer. I’m on 2 lines of code per hour, so I’m not exactly rushing.
Shell scripting is quite annoying to be sure. Thinking of learning python instead.