As an experienced software dev I’m convinced my software quality has improved by using AI. More time for thinking and less time for execution means I can make more iterations of the design and don’t have to skip as many nice-to-haves or unit tests on account of limited time. It’s not like I don’t go through every code line multiple times anyway, I don’t just blindly accept code. As a bonus I can ask the AI to review the code and produce documentation. By the time I’m done there’s little left of what was originally generated.
Na, the tools suck. I’m not using a rubber hammer to get woodscrews into concrete and I’m not using “AI” for something that requires a brain. I’ve looked at “AI” suggestions for coding and it was >95% garbage. If “AI” makes someone a better coder it tells more about that someone than “AI”.
Then try writing the code yourself and ask ChatGPT’s o3-mini-high to critique your code (be sure to explain the context).
Or ask it to produce unit tests - even if they’re not perfect from the get go I promise you will save time by having a starting skeleton.
Another thing I often use it for is ad hoc transformations. For example I wanted to generate constants for all the SQLSTATE codes in the PostgreSQL documentation. I just pasted the table directly from the documentation and got symbolic constants with the appropriate values and with documentation comments.
As an experienced software dev, I know better than to waste my time writing boilerplate that can be vomited up by an LLM, since somebody else has already written it and I should just use that instead.
Unit tests and good architecture are still foundational requirements, so far no bug reports with any of these updates. In fact a huge chunk of these ai updates were addressing bugs. Not sure why you’re so mad at what you imagine is happening and making so many broad assumptions!
If the benefits of this technology were evenly distributed the argument might have a leg to stand on, but it is never evenly distributed. It is always used as a way to pay professionals less for work that is “just okay.”
When a business buys the tools to use generative AI and they shitcan employees to afford it they have effectively used those employees labor against them to replace them with something lesser. Their labor was exploited to replace them. The people who actually deserve the bonus of generative AI are losing or being expected to be ten times more productive instead of being allowed to cool their heels because they worked hard enough to have this doohickey work for them. No, it’s always “line must go up, rich must get richer, fuck the laborers.”
I’ll stop being an ass about it when people stop burning employees out who already work hard or straight up fire them and replace them with this bullshit when their labor is what allowed the business to afford this bullshit to begin with. No manager or CEO can do all this labor on their own, but they get the fruits of all the labor their employees do as though they did do it all on their own, and it is fucked up.
I don’t have a problem with technology that makes our lives easier. I don’t have a problem with copyright violations (copyright as it exists is broken. It still needs to exist, just not in its current form).
What I have a problem with is businesses using this as an excuse to work their employees like slaves or replacing the employees that allowed them to afford these tools with these tools.
When everyone who worked hard to afford this stuff gets a paid vacation for helping to afford the tools and then comes back to an easier workload because the tools help that much, I’ll stop being a fucking ass about it.
Like I said elsewhere, the bottom line is business owners want a slave that doesn’t need things like sleep, food, emotional support, and never pushes back against being abused. I’m tired of people pretending like it’s not what businesses want. I’m tired of people pretending this does anything except make already overworked employees bust even more ass.
Nah bro, you were in an argument about wether or not AI can be a useful tool only to then pivot to a meta argument about ethics (which I agree with btw). But something can be a useful tool and unethical at the same time so your line of argument is nonsense.
I weep for your customers
As an experienced software dev I’m convinced my software quality has improved by using AI. More time for thinking and less time for execution means I can make more iterations of the design and don’t have to skip as many nice-to-haves or unit tests on account of limited time. It’s not like I don’t go through every code line multiple times anyway, I don’t just blindly accept code. As a bonus I can ask the AI to review the code and produce documentation. By the time I’m done there’s little left of what was originally generated.
If a bot can develop your software better than you then you’re a shit software dev
Then your software quality was extreme shit before. It’s still shit, but an improvement. So, yay “AI”, I guess?
That seems like just wishful thinking on your part, or maybe you haven’t learned how to use these tools properly.
Na, the tools suck. I’m not using a rubber hammer to get woodscrews into concrete and I’m not using “AI” for something that requires a brain. I’ve looked at “AI” suggestions for coding and it was >95% garbage. If “AI” makes someone a better coder it tells more about that someone than “AI”.
Then try writing the code yourself and ask ChatGPT’s o3-mini-high to critique your code (be sure to explain the context).
Or ask it to produce unit tests - even if they’re not perfect from the get go I promise you will save time by having a starting skeleton.
Another thing I often use it for is ad hoc transformations. For example I wanted to generate constants for all the SQLSTATE codes in the PostgreSQL documentation. I just pasted the table directly from the documentation and got symbolic constants with the appropriate values and with documentation comments.
As an experienced software dev, I know better than to waste my time writing boilerplate that can be vomited up by an LLM, since somebody else has already written it and I should just use that instead.
They’re all pretty fired up at the update velocity tbh 🤷
Yeah, nothing pleases us more than constant, buggy updates.
Unit tests and good architecture are still foundational requirements, so far no bug reports with any of these updates. In fact a huge chunk of these ai updates were addressing bugs. Not sure why you’re so mad at what you imagine is happening and making so many broad assumptions!
Don’t be an ass and realize that ai is a great tool for a lot of people. Why is that so hard to comprehend?
It’s not hard to comprehend. It’s that we literally have jackasses like Sam Altman arguing that if they can’t commit copyright violations at an industrial scale and pace that their business model falls apart. Yet, we’re still nailing regular people for piracy on an individual scale. As always individuals pay the price and are treated like criminals, but as long as you commit crime big enough and fast enough on an industrial scale, we shake our heads, go “wow” and treat you like a fucking hero.
If the benefits of this technology were evenly distributed the argument might have a leg to stand on, but it is never evenly distributed. It is always used as a way to pay professionals less for work that is “just okay.”
When a business buys the tools to use generative AI and they shitcan employees to afford it they have effectively used those employees labor against them to replace them with something lesser. Their labor was exploited to replace them. The people who actually deserve the bonus of generative AI are losing or being expected to be ten times more productive instead of being allowed to cool their heels because they worked hard enough to have this doohickey work for them. No, it’s always “line must go up, rich must get richer, fuck the laborers.”
I’ll stop being an ass about it when people stop burning employees out who already work hard or straight up fire them and replace them with this bullshit when their labor is what allowed the business to afford this bullshit to begin with. No manager or CEO can do all this labor on their own, but they get the fruits of all the labor their employees do as though they did do it all on their own, and it is fucked up.
I don’t have a problem with technology that makes our lives easier. I don’t have a problem with copyright violations (copyright as it exists is broken. It still needs to exist, just not in its current form).
What I have a problem with is businesses using this as an excuse to work their employees like slaves or replacing the employees that allowed them to afford these tools with these tools.
When everyone who worked hard to afford this stuff gets a paid vacation for helping to afford the tools and then comes back to an easier workload because the tools help that much, I’ll stop being a fucking ass about it.
Like I said elsewhere, the bottom line is business owners want a slave that doesn’t need things like sleep, food, emotional support, and never pushes back against being abused. I’m tired of people pretending like it’s not what businesses want. I’m tired of people pretending this does anything except make already overworked employees bust even more ass.
Your comment is on capitalism, not scaling ai or ai being used with effect.
If you can’t see how the two are inextricably tied together, I don’t know what to tell you.
This reeks of “keep politics out of our video games” kind of shit. They’re not actually separate issues.
Nah bro, you were in an argument about wether or not AI can be a useful tool only to then pivot to a meta argument about ethics (which I agree with btw). But something can be a useful tool and unethical at the same time so your line of argument is nonsense.
What’s hard for you to comprehend about my comment?
You are insulting a person, because they said ai helps them.
They really did that themselves.
You hate ai or not, maybe you just found one more excuse to be an asshole online, don’t know, don’t care, bye.
You seem to enjoy continuing to engage.
😂