← All IntelClip / AI ToolsThe durable skill: taste to judge LLM output
From Vibe Coding Is The Future · ≈21:38
“you have to have the taste and enough training to know that the llm is spitting bad stuff or good stuff”
“in order to do good VI coding you still need to have the taste and you still need that kind of classical train maybe not necessarily classical train but enough knowledge to judge what's good versus bad and you only become good with enough practice”
“I think there going to be a generation of softw Engineers that are like good enough because it's so easy to retool there with with all these coach tools like the barrier ENT is so low you're going to be good enough Engineers there's going to be tons of those but to be exceptional like the top 1% I think you're going to need to get into deliberate practice”
“what's happening with now Coen tools is that is very cheap to put in the hours because the output is just so quickly you can get to good enough but to become the best in the world and the best founder you're going to need that delivered practice”
What’s in it
- Argues reading code, debugging, and code-review judgment become the constant skills — interviews shift toward code review — and that AI-native founders must still develop taste or the startup dies at scale.
Clip transcript
the correct answer is to that yeah I think there going to be probably you're going to test for different things because I also did a lot of engineering hiring I think one key skill that's going to I think remain that's constant I do think skills of reading code and debugging are maximum is like you have to have the taste and enough training to know that the llm is spitting bad stuff or good stuff so like bad code or good and I think you can see it clearly sometimes if a candidate is using the tools and there's actually a reasonable solution that the llm outputs and then the candid is like oh this is actually bad that is a sign so I think knowing kind of more the high level thinking to know what is good versus bad in order to do good VI coding you still need to have the taste and you still need that kind of classical train maybe not necessarily classical train but enough knowledge to judge what's good versus bad and you only become good with enough practice I think that will be one that will be constant that would be my opinion yeah that's interesting just coder it's like more like code review as the interview versus like actually like producing code yeah I I mean you could have a some form of system design you want to know how good they can put a product out there so then is testing for taste so we're going to test for debugging and then taste but then how do you get to I guess this is a question going to these kits that you have that we call it AI coding natives yeah how do you develop taste when you don't come from a classically train World which would be interesting for next gener well you have to because if you don't the startup dies right so let's say this founder they go off they have 95% written by AI the proof is in a year out two years out um they you know have a 100 million users on that thing you know does it fall over or not and then one of the things that's pretty clear is these systems uh you know in the first realm the first versions of reasoning models they're not that good at debugging so you actually would need to descend down into the depths of what's actually happening yeah and if you can't then you got you I mean let's hope that they can go find another architect they're going to have to hire someone who can I think there going to be a generation of softw Engineers that are like good enough because it's so easy to retool there with with all these coach tools like the barrier ENT is so low you're going to be good enough Engineers there's going to be tons of those but to be exceptional like the top 1% I think you're going to need to get into deliberate practice I mean the analogy we're talking about is uh Mal and Gladwell popularize this concept of 10,000 hours of practice to become an expert which came from this research from uh what was his name the uh Anders Ericson Anderson Ericson right which it wasn't just the research was very specific it was about uh how do you find World Class violinist and it wasn't about just putting the time but delivered practice it's like hours that actually plan and thought and is hard work you could become an expert with less hours so I think what's happening with now Coen tools is that is very cheap to put in the hours because the output is just so quickly you can get to good enough but to become the best in the world and the best founder you're going to need that delivered practice to go into the details and you're G to have to peel the onion and understand the systems and get to again to some extent being classically trained I mean a good example is maybe we go back to history is like Picasso one of the greatest painters it was amazing at drawing lifelike pictures which is not what he's famous for of course when when you imagine a Picasso you imagine the opposite of that yeah there's this famous sequence of drawings on how he got to a abstract Bowl it starts from being lifelike to iterations until he gets to the essent to kind of the abstract art that he's very well known for but he could could only get to be the best in the world because he was actually a very good painter and classically trained and could draw super well but that's not what he's known for so I do think we'll see these two classes of Engineers you'll still have like a very fat class of like good enough you need Engineers for those but the best in the world the founders that become outliers are going to need to put in the deliberate practice yes and no I
Comments
Checking sign-in…
Loading comments…