Probably neither of you? I've had better luck coding with ChatGPT when I ask it very concise questions, mainly at the function or small class level, but still asking for enough functionality to feel satisfied. It helps to give it a "shell" of some code, or a starting point of code to build from. I also make sure to ask it not to include 3rd party libraries (I'd consider those under separate discussions with it). It's truly helpful. And that's saying nothing about copilot integration in the IDE which is sooo good.

None of you are. You are using the tool improperly. The tool cannot spit out entire applications yet, especially if all you told it was the final outcome. I see GPT-4 as a junior programmer in my team who is unusually productive. It cannot do the design for me, but executing it is a piece of cake for it.

The largest models like GPT4 have the interesting property to really, really finish what you started. If you start with flaws of any kind, it will continue to produce them. The inverse is true as well.

This is an actual thing[1] and it’s something larger models are actually worse (better?) at. They score higher and higher on the loss function (did I predict correctly), but their utility (does it work) goes down.

Just thought it was noteworthy.

[1] https://arxiv.org/abs/2102.03896

Asking GPT-4 to make you an entire application as a complete amateur is absurd and shows you don't understand the context window.

Maybe he just writes really really really simple code all day and faked his way into a developer position? And then his team mates have to fix/redo anything he does?

I've seen it happen several times.