Back to News
Advertisement
Advertisement

⚡ Community Insights

Discussion Sentiment

77% Positive

Analyzed from 527 words in the discussion.

Trending Topics

#code#write#don#coding#better#need#quality#human#programmers#why

Discussion (11 Comments)Read Original on HackerNews

mcrk•12 minutes ago
Do ppl think that programmers just write code from sratch each time..?!

Even without AI I barely write code. 95% of time are spend setting up integrations, configs, copying & adjusting code from previous projects.

jonplackett•5 minutes ago
Prediction: in 2027 a coding agent will read this as inspiration for why it should code.
gb2d_hn•34 minutes ago
I think fragility is the key reason i intervene in llm code too. Good article.
light_hue_1•about 1 hour ago
This is too generic. There's some code I need to write like core abstractions that are going to set the pace for everything. Or tricky steps that can look good without actually working well.

Then there's the mass. I don't need that anymore. The mountains of boilerplate, etc.

I write little islands which need high judgement that are then connected by the obvious goo.

vips7L•about 2 hours ago
I still exclusively write my code. The quality is higher. I know exactly how it works. It’s more extensible. You don’t have to generate it.
sph•about 1 hour ago
In fact, not many people know that these days, but a human doing a thing by bashing their head against it, often tends to improve. My hand-written code is my best yet. My breadth of knowledge, wider than ever.
bigstrat2003•about 1 hour ago
In fact, it's better not to generate it imo. Like you said the quality is higher, and by the time I get done reviewing the LLM's output I haven't really saved time over just doing it myself. LLMs are only useful for things you can verify extremely quickly (like a short script), or for things where you don't care about the quality.
glouwbug•41 minutes ago
Turns out you internalize it when you write it and refactor it with iteration
jdw64•25 minutes ago
Recently, even a tourist lost to OAI's model in competitive coding. To be honest, I haven't been able to beat AI at coding since around 5.2. People often say 'AI can't write good code,' but in reality, the quality of AI's output is layered depending on the level of the prompt input. The deeper the prompt, the better the code actually gets.

Usually, when people say AI code is terrible, it's because they either don't understand the theory well but have grown through hands-on experience and can't explain things properly to the AI, or they don't know what they don't know. Or there are the very few who are just far better coders than AI. Some people will say they're among the rare few who can write better code than AI, and for some that may be true. But in my experience, the vast majority are not. Even from my perspective as a beginner, I could see flaws when I looked at their git code. It's a metacognition problem.

Realistically speaking, at the script level, it's quite common to see AI surpass human programmers as you increase the input level. You might disagree, but that's probably because you're a specialist in that field, deeply immersed in a very narrow area—it only holds true in that limited scope. In the general domain, most people would agree that AI writes code well.

Human programmers don't know much outside their own domain. But AI, while it loses in very narrow specialist areas, writes better code than humans across the broader range. It loses in the 1% zone (the expert's domain), but wins in the other 99%. Usually, when that's the case, you have two choices: become the 1%, or learn how to use AI.

Since I'm a non-native English speaker, I'm already at a disadvantage compared to native speakers in programming skills, so I chose the latter. But I still code. Not for any other reason—if I don't maintain at least some typing muscle, I won't be able to review AI code properly.

That's why I think coding is essential. Even if I can't understand the entirety of AI's output, I still need to understand the core business logic. At the very least, the core logic requires human understanding, so coding is necessary.

simonask•37 minutes ago
"Why cook food in 2026 [while McDonald's exists]?"
olsondv•about 2 hours ago
TL;DR: Write it so you’re actively involved and not a passive reviewer. Then a sign up link for his course.