(no title)
ezoe | 2 months ago
Garage Duo can out-compete corporate because there is less overhead. But Garage Duo can't possibly output the sheer amount of work matching with corporate.
ezoe | 2 months ago
Garage Duo can out-compete corporate because there is less overhead. But Garage Duo can't possibly output the sheer amount of work matching with corporate.
fancyfredbot|2 months ago
I think that the reason LLMs don't work as well in a corporate environment with large codebases and complex business logic, but do work well in greenfield projects, is linked to the amount of context the agents can maintain.
Many types of corporate overhead can be reduced using an LLM. Especially following "well meant but inefficient" process around JIRA tickets, testing evidence, code review, documentation etc.
pigpop|2 months ago
nradov|2 months ago
kamaal|2 months ago
There have been methods to reduce overhead available over the history of our industry. Unfortunately almost all the times it involves using productive tools that would in some way reduce the head counts required to do large projects.
The way this works is you eventually have to work with languages like Lisp, Perl, Prolog, and then some one comes up with a theory that programming must be optimised for the mostly beginners and power tooling must be avoided. Now you are forced to use verbose languages, writing, maintaining and troubleshooting take a lot of people.
The thing is this time around, we have a way to make code by asking an AI tool questions. So you get the same effect but now with languages like JS and Python.
jennyholzer3|2 months ago