41–50 of 136 posts
I'm running a startup and we deliberately don't use AI for development. We only use it for review. We're working in a really deep area where having full understanding of our code is more important than speed. Besides, in this area, clients getting one whiff of AI code would be an immediate deal-killer
Do you know any company that went back from local AI to centralized AI?
Ford did: https://www.forbes.com/sites/joetoscano1/2026/06/30/ford-hir... So did Commonwealth Bank of Australia and IBM: https://www.cnbc.com/2026/07/01/employers-who-laid-off-worke... And I'm sure many others who didn't publicize it because they have to keep this circular economy going.
> circular economy I get what you mean, but in general circular economy means something different, positive in my opinion. Here is what wikipedia has to say: > a model of resource production and consumption that involves sharing, leasing, reusing, repairing, refurbishing, and recycling materials and products, to extend product life cycle for as long as possible In the EU it is a hot topic for a lot of non-profit and…
I don’t think that would ever happen. AI as a tool made the life so much easier removing initial inertia. I agree that we still haven’t figured out what’s the best way to use AI tools, but over the time it would mature and people would come up with patterns, conventions, and design principles so the quality of what is produced will be maintained or increased while keeping the productivity gains.
Every single person I talk too that is enthusiastic about AI is so because they can't code for shit. Sure, then the AI seems better. But it never really is. Learn to code, that inertia you are talking about is the technical debt. It will drag you down into the abyss eventually
In my startup, I am currently in consideration for doing this exact thing. The interesting part is it's not really the AI that's causing the issue. It's the ease of my developer to make a mess, either with messy code or feature bloat. After figuring out the exact product we need with some very quick development cycles with AI, we now have some problems that I can't keep under control because of AI. So, currently unde…
There definitely going to be a lot of fortune 500 companies absolutely wrecked by the amount of changes to their code base that no one will be "responsible" for because none of the workers will really know if it was their agent that changed something.
There could be some outliers who found the correct tools at the right time, but I don't think they'll suddenly be thrust into the money, because good code is definitely not the only thing that lets people succeed.
I think devs themselves won't want to work for a company that doesn't let you use Codex et al.
Do you know of any company that banned IDEs and went back to plain text only editing? Do you know of any company that banned compilers and went back to hand written assembly? Do you know of any company that banned stack overflow and went back to figuring everything out?
In what context would generating code faster not be a desired outcome? Assuming of course everything else stays the same (quality, etc.)
I think most AI doomers will tell you that the quality of their code is better than LLM-generated code.
The last time I've checked ai still had an edge adding new features, but the team collectively lost the project knowledge and any problem discovered that llm could not fix took significantly longer to correct - they were effectively working on a new to them codebase.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yeah I cant imagine my job without it anymore, in my hobby projects I dont really use it because its more about learning new stuff but for work I dont really care
That's so depressing, and a real loss for your employer. Even if they neither know nor care that you are now sandbagging them, you still are. You aren't making real gains because you're tossing out value of equivalent or greater worth (your learning and engagement)