181–190 of 321 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder over the long term how programmers are going to maintain the proficiency to read and edit the code that the LLM produces.
I don’t read or edit the code my claude code agent produces. That’s its job now. My job is to organize the process and get things done.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I wonder over the long term how programmers are going to maintain the proficiency to read and edit the code that the LLM produces.
I don’t read or edit the code my claude code agent produces. That’s its job now. My job is to organize the process and get things done.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i'm sorry if I pulled everybody down .. but it's been many months since gemini and claude became solid tools, and regularly i have this strong gut feeling. i tried reevaluating my perception of my work, goals, value .. but i keep going back to nope.
I hear you. And maybe you're right. Maybe I'm deluding myself, but: when I look at my skilled colleagues who vibecode, I can't understand how this is sustainable. They're smart people, but they've clearly turned off. They can't answer non-trivial questions about the details of the stuff they (vibe-)delivered without asking the LLM that wrote it. Whoever uses the code downstream aren't gonna stand (or pay!) for this l…
Some will have to crash and burn their company before they realize that no human at all in the loop is a non sense. Let them touch fire and make up their mind I guess.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Alternatively, another second order effect is can't sip latte anymore because you're orchestrating 8 bots do the work and you're back to 80%-100% time saturation.
The previous second order effect is more likely. For the one orchestrating 8 bots, 7 others are not needed anymore.
What I believe is going to be interesting is what happens when non-engineers adopt building with agentic AI. Maybe 70 or 80% of their needs will be met without anyone else directly involved. My suspicion is that it will just create more work: making those generated apps work in a trustworthy manner, giving the agents more access to build context and make decisions, turning those one off generated apps into something maintainable, etc.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> AI just means more output will be expected of you, and they'll keep pushing you to work as hard as you can. That’s a bit too cynical for me. After all, yes, your boss is not paying you for sipping lattes, but for producing value for the company. If there is a tool that maximises your output, why wouldn’t he want you to use that to great efficiency? Put differently, would a carpenter shop accept employees rejecting…
> why wouldn’t he want you to use that to great efficiency Because I deny that? It's not fun for me. > would a carpenter shop accept employees rejecting the power saw in favour of a hand saw to retain their artisanal capability? Why not? If that makes enough money to keep going. You might argue that in theoretical ideal market companies who're not utilizing every possible trick to improve productivity (including AI)…
I started this career because I liked writing code. I no longer write a lot of code as a lead, but I use writing code to learn, to gain a deeper understanding of the problem domain etc. I'm not the type who wants to write specs for every method and service but rather explore and discover and draft and refactor by... well, coding. I'm amazed at creating and reading beautiful, stylish, working code that tells a story.
If that's taken away, I'm not sure how I could retain my interest in this profession. Maybe I'll need to find something else, but after almost a decade this will be a hard shift.
I wonder at the end of this if it's the still worth the risk? A lot of how I form my thoughts is driven by writing code, and seeing it on screen, running into its limitations. Maybe it's the kind of work I'm doing, or maybe I just suck, but the code to me is a forcing mechanism into ironing out the details, and I don't get that when I'm writing a specification.
>but the code to me is a forcing mechanism into ironing out the details, and I don't get that when I'm writing a specification. This is so on point. The spec as code people try again and again. But reality always punches holes in their spec. A spec that wasn't exercised in code, is like a drawing of a car, no matter how detailed that drawing is, you can't drive it, and it hides 90% of the complexity. To me the value…
The problem is that this spec-driven philosophy (or hype, or mirage...) would lead to code being entirely deprecated, at least according to its proponents. They say that using LLMs as advisors is already outdated, we should be doing fully agentic coding and just nudge the LLM etc. since we're losing out on 'productivity'.
I wonder at the end of this if it's the still worth the risk? A lot of how I form my thoughts is driven by writing code, and seeing it on screen, running into its limitations. Maybe it's the kind of work I'm doing, or maybe I just suck, but the code to me is a forcing mechanism into ironing out the details, and I don't get that when I'm writing a specification.
That's because many developers are used to working like this. With AI, the correct approach is to think more like a software architect. Learning to plan things out in your head upfront without to figure things out while coding requires a mindset shift, but is important to work effectively with the new tools. To some this comes naturally, for others it is very hard.
I dont think any complex plan should be planned in your head. But drawing diagrams, sketching components, listing pros and cons, 100%. Not jumping directly into coding might look more like jumping into spec writing a poc
Earlier quoted context omitted.
i'm sorry if I pulled everybody down .. but it's been many months since gemini and claude became solid tools, and regularly i have this strong gut feeling. i tried reevaluating my perception of my work, goals, value .. but i keep going back to nope.
I hear you. And maybe you're right. Maybe I'm deluding myself, but: when I look at my skilled colleagues who vibecode, I can't understand how this is sustainable. They're smart people, but they've clearly turned off. They can't answer non-trivial questions about the details of the stuff they (vibe-)delivered without asking the LLM that wrote it. Whoever uses the code downstream aren't gonna stand (or pay!) for this l…
Too bad that software developers are carrying water for those who hate them and mock them for being obsolete in 6-12 months, while they are eating caviar (probably evading sanctions) and clink the champagne glasses in Davos: https://xcancel.com/hamptonism/status/2019434933178306971 And all that after stealing everyone's output.