@hanshuebner @plexus @flooper

Yes, »worse is better« morphed from /description/ to /prescription/. (There is a nice talk by Romeu Moura about this fallacy: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=92Pq4-e0QyI)

In short: people erroneously move from »it's like this« to »it should be like this« or »it's inevitable like this«, and then enshrine it as a given fact, assumption or axiom instead of asking what can be done about it.

@hanshuebner @plexus

…
- LLMs generate straw-fire software. It seems to burn at first, but it's not even hot enough to start a real fire.

- This seems cheap in a very short-term view, and it might satisfy short-term “wants”, but it's not sustainable.

- We need to start fixing somewhere. Two holes in a bucket are not a dilemma, but two tasks.

@hanshuebner @plexus

You are stating a lot of assumptions:

- That the qualities that software exposes on the outside are largely independent of its inner workings.

- That LLMs make the creation process more efficient.

- That LLM-generated software is cheap and does what users “want.”

- That fixing one thing is not worthwhile while other things are not fixed.

But:

- Inner quality does matter a lot. E. g. JIRA receives a lot of complaints because it is not well designed internally.

…