Anti-LLM Sentiment Considered Harmful

carter: > i have some fun thoughts that i think land in the middle carter: > the tools for using these models currently suck! and no one has realized that the runner /harness around the model can have an incredible impact on quality of work and agentic reliability broadly Could you give a couple examples of what you mean? I’ve been following along this interesting thread too, as a Haskell curious developer. It seems to me that what people really resist (and rightly so) is “slop”. However, IMO, “ai tools” are just tools, you can do great or horrible things with them. If I had to evaluate it, I’d say I can go 3 times as fast when coding with AI-assistance, with equivalent or better quality. And I use a simple prompt to initialize a “tdd workflow”, such that I review micro changes and add them to my git stages, only to commit “logical units of work”. With that workflow, I’ve been very happy with where I’ve landed… So, to me, a good AI flow is TDD + good prompts (transformed into skills if replay-ability is required) But you seem to suggest that there’s something more to that? Not to derail this thread, but I’d be interested to hear your opinions on the matter. Note that I’ve explored alternative CLI agents (such as “pi”, “opencode”, etc.), and their extensions (such as “omp” and so on), different models including Chinese ones, etc. And I haven’t felt any of them moved the needle in the grand scheme of things. I see more micro improvements that don’t really change the fundamentals of programming. I’d be interested to hear anyone else’s opinion on the matter of course, including Haskell-specific considerations.