101–110 of 584 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I will personally say right now... its not gonna change lol. People who actually know how to think can see it a mile away.
It's telling you feel the need to create a throw away to voice this opinion.
Job done fella.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This - I can't think of any place I've ever worked where development ever outpaced backlog and tech debt.
When you work long enough you'll find it. Places where changing software is risky you can end up waiting for approvals. Places where another company purchased yours or you are getting shutdown soon and there is no new work. Sometimes you end up on a system that they want to replace but they never get around to it. Being overworked is sometimes better than being underworked. Sometimes the reserve is better. They both…
In that sort of high-fear, change-adverse environment "get rid of all the devs and let the AI do it" may not be the most compelling sales pitch to leadership. ("Use it to port the code faster so we can spend more time on the migration plan and manual testing" might have better luck.)
I'm working on a project right now, that is heavily informed by AI. I wouldn't even try it, if I didn't have the help. It's a big job. However, I can't imagine vibe-coders actually shipping anything. I really have to ride herd on the output from the LLM. Sometimes, the error is PEBCAK, because I erred, when I prompted, and that can lead to very subtle issues. I no longer review every line, but I also have not yet got…
>> I no longer review every line, but I also have not yet gotten to the point, where I can just "trust" the LLM. Same here. This is also why I haven't been able to switch to Claude Code, despite trying to multiple times. I feel like its mode of operation is much more "just trust to generated code" than Cursor, which let's you review and accept/reject diffs with a very obvious and easy to use UX.
I don't have the bandwidth to juggle four independent things being worked on by agents in parallel so the single-IDE "bottleneck" is not slowing me down. That seems to work a lot better for heavy-boilerplate or heavy-greenfield stuff.
I am curious about if we refactored our codebase the right way, would more small/isolatable subtasks be parallelizable with lower cognitive load? But I haven't found it yet.
How is Anthropic getting this data? Are they running science experiments on people's chat history? (In the app, API or both?)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's telling you feel the need to create a throw away to voice this opinion.
1) Not a throaway, can't remember what my old account is called 2) Feel free to screen shot. Stick it on your desktop and set a reminder and check the state of the world in 12 months time. Job done fella.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... but I'm still waiting on others most of the time, the overall company processes haven't improved or gotten more efficient. The same blockers as always still exist. And that's the key problem, isn't it? I maintain current organizations have the "wrong shape" to fully leverage AI. Imagine instead of the scope of your current ownership, you own everything your team or your whole department owns. Consider what that…
> Imagine instead of > Now imagine > Imagine what that would do Imagine if your grandma had wheels! She'd be a bicycle. Now imagine she had an engine. She could be a motorcycle! Unfortunately for grandma, she lives in reality and is not actually a motorcycle, which would be cool as hell. Our imagination can only take us so far. To more substantively reply to your longer linked comment: your hypothesis is that people…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> ... but I'm still waiting on others most of the time, the overall company processes haven't improved or gotten more efficient. The same blockers as always still exist. And that's the key problem, isn't it? I maintain current organizations have the "wrong shape" to fully leverage AI. Imagine instead of the scope of your current ownership, you own everything your team or your whole department owns. Consider what that…
> Imagine instead of > Now imagine > Imagine what that would do Imagine if your grandma had wheels! She'd be a bicycle. Now imagine she had an engine. She could be a motorcycle! Unfortunately for grandma, she lives in reality and is not actually a motorcycle, which would be cool as hell. Our imagination can only take us so far. To more substantively reply to your longer linked comment: your hypothesis is that people…
> Imagine if your grandma had wheels! She'd be a bicycle.
Too early to say what AI brings to the efficiency table I think. In some major things I do it's a 1000x speed up. In others it is more a different way of approaching a problem than a speed up. In yet others, it is a bit of an impediment. It works best when you learn to quickly recognize patterns and whether it will help. I don't know how people who are raised with ai will navigate and leverage it, which is the real long-term question (just as the difference between pre- and post-smartphone generations is a thing).
I don't write code for a living but I administer and maintain it. Every time I say this people get really angry, but: so far AI has had almost no impact on my job. Neither my dev team nor my vendors are getting me software faster than they were two years ago. Docker had a bigger impact on the pipeline to me than AI has. Maybe this will change, but until it does I'm mostly watching bemusedly.
I don't write code for a living but I administer and maintain it. Every time I say this people get really angry, but: so far AI has had almost no impact on my job. Neither my dev team nor my vendors are getting me software faster than they were two years ago. Docker had a bigger impact on the pipeline to me than AI has. Maybe this will change, but until it does I'm mostly watching bemusedly.
> so far AI has had almost no impact on my job. Are you hiring?
IMO AI will make 70-80% job obsolete for sure.