AI adoption has reduced productivity at my workplace, and by a noticeable amount!
That's expected for any new "low-code" solution du jour.
Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
21–30 of 99 posts
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#22You're only as fast as your biggest bottleneck. Adding AI to an existing organization is just going to show you where your bottlenecks are, it's not going to magically make them go away. For most companies, the speed of writing code probably wasn't the bottleneck in the first place.
This. The key bottleneck in many organizations is the "socialize and align" on what to build. Or just "socialize and align" in general. :)
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#23[dead]
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#24Earlier quoted context omitted.
one thing that aways slowed me down was writing jsdocs and testing. Now i can write one example of a pass and then get codex to read the code and write a test for all the branches in that section saves time as it can type a lot faster than i can and its mostly copying the example i already have but changing the input to hit all the branches.
> let's have LLMs check our code for correctness Lmao. Rofl even. (Testing is the one thing you would never outsource to AI.)
Outsourcing testing to AI makes perfect sense if you assume that tests exist out of an obligation to meet some code coverage requirements, rather than to ensure correctness. Often I'll write a module and a few tests that cover its functionality, only for CI to complain that line coverage has decreased and reject my merge! AI to the rescue! A perfect job for a bullshit generator.
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#25You're only as fast as your biggest bottleneck. Adding AI to an existing organization is just going to show you where your bottlenecks are, it's not going to magically make them go away. For most companies, the speed of writing code probably wasn't the bottleneck in the first place.
In high-performance teams it is. In bike-shedding environments of course it is not.
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#26Apparently "AI is speeding up the onboarding process", they say. But isn't that because the onboarding process is about learning, and by having an AI regurgitate the answers you can complete the process without learning anything, which might speed it up but completely defeats the purpose?
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#27Earlier quoted context omitted.
It seems like they should be able to “overweight” newer training data. But the risk is the newer training data is going to skew more towards AI slop than older training data.
There won't ever be newer training data. The OG data came from sites like Stackoverflow. These sites will stop existing once LLMs become better and easier to use. Game over.
Every time claude code runs tests or builds after a change, it's collecting training data.
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#28Earlier quoted context omitted.
one thing that aways slowed me down was writing jsdocs and testing. Now i can write one example of a pass and then get codex to read the code and write a test for all the branches in that section saves time as it can type a lot faster than i can and its mostly copying the example i already have but changing the input to hit all the branches.
> let's have LLMs check our code for correctness Lmao. Rofl even. (Testing is the one thing you would never outsource to AI.)
You don't use the LLM to check your code for correctness; you use the LLM to generate tests to exercise code paths, and verify that they do exercise those code paths.
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#29Apparently "AI is speeding up the onboarding process", they say. But isn't that because the onboarding process is about learning, and by having an AI regurgitate the answers you can complete the process without learning anything, which might speed it up but completely defeats the purpose?
Correct. Reading code is important. The details are in the minutia, and the way code works is that the minutia are important.
Summarizing this with AI makes you lose that context.
Re: Productivity gains from AI coding assistants haven’t budged past 10% – survey
#30Earlier quoted context omitted.
There won't ever be newer training data. The OG data came from sites like Stackoverflow. These sites will stop existing once LLMs become better and easier to use. Game over.
Every time claude code runs tests or builds after a change, it's collecting training data.
[dead]