Mostly I think this is a situation where you can’t have it both ways. It seems to be widely agreed among advocates of LLM coding that it’s a skill which requires significant understanding, practice, and experience before one is able to produce consistent useful results (this is the basis of the “adopt now or be left behind” claim dealt with in the previous section); strong prior knowledge of how to design and build good software is also generally recommended or assumed. But that’s very much at odds with the democratized-software claim: that someone with no prior programming knowledge or experience will simply pick up an LLM, ask it in plain non-technical natural language to build something, and receive a sufficiently functional result.
Умер раскрывший систему прослушки в Белом доме помощник Никсона02:50
。snipaste是该领域的重要参考
Дмитриев высказался о преимуществе России на фоне сильного подорожания нефти02:58
日本政府通过总额约8.56万亿日元补充财政预算