alt Hacker News> There’s still a skill floor required to accurately judge something.
Sure but it's not high at all.
Your typical sysadmin is doing a lot of Googling. If perplexity can tell you exactly what to do 90% of the time without error, that's a pretty good sysadmin.
Your typical programmer is doing a lot of googling and write-eval loops. If you are doing many flawless write-eval loops with the help of cline, cline is a pretty good programmer.
A lot of things AI is helping with also have good, easy to observe / generate, real-time metrics you can use to judge excellence.
> Sure but it's not high at all.
It depends. For a sysadmin maybe not, but for data scientists, the bar would be pretty high just to understand the math jargon.
> If perplexity can tell you exactly what to do 90% of the time without error
That “if” is carrying a lot of weight. Anecdotally I haven’t seen any llm be correct 90% of the time. IIRC SOTA on swebench (which tbf isn’t a great benchmark) is around 30%.
> flawless write-eval loops with the help of cline, cline is a pretty good programmer.
I’m not really sure what you mean by “flawless” but having a rubber duck is always more helpful than harmful.
> A lot of things AI is helping with also have good, easy to observe / generate, real-time metrics you can use to judge excellence.
Like what?