231–240 of 498 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Also there are people occasionally poisoning the community pot, don't forget that bit.
Beef wellington with deathcap mushrooms anyone?
I have prompt docs precisely on SOLID, TDD and all kinds of design patterns… but yes I see a lot of untested code these days.
AI has been incredibly helpful at analyzing existing, unknown to me, projects; basically for debugging and searching in these repo’s.
Multiple things can be true at the same time: 1. LLMs do not increase general developer productivity by 10x across the board for general purpose tasks selected at random. 2. LLMs dramatically increases productivity for a limited subset of tasks 3. LLMs can be automated to do busy work and although they may take longer in terms of clock time than a human, the work is effectively done in the background. LLMs can get me…
Would it more correct to change this > LLMs can get me up to speed on new APIs and libraries far faster than I can myself To this? > LLMs can get me up to speed on old APIs and old libraries that are new to me far faster than I can myself My experience is if the library/API/tool is new then the LLM can't help. But maybe I'm using it wrong.
From the post, if AI was supposed to make everyone 25% more productive, then a 4 month project becomes a 3 month project. It doesn't become a 1 day project. Was the author making games and other apps in 30 hours? Because that seems like a 4 month project?
Multiple things can be true at the same time: 1. LLMs do not increase general developer productivity by 10x across the board for general purpose tasks selected at random. 2. LLMs dramatically increases productivity for a limited subset of tasks 3. LLMs can be automated to do busy work and although they may take longer in terms of clock time than a human, the work is effectively done in the background. LLMs can get me…
Weren't the code generators before this even better though? They generated consistent results and were dead quick at doing it.
>” Now, I’ve spent a lot of money and weeks putting the data for this article together, processing tens of terabytes of data in some cases. So I hope you appreciate how utterly uninspiring and flat these charts are across every major sector of software development.”
Somehow, in cyber, everyone believes that transformers will generate better answers than not to use the 10 most common passwords. It's like the whole knowledge about decision making theory, neural nets, GANs, LSTMs etc completely got wiped out and forgotten within less than 10 years.
I understand the awesomeness of LLMs while debugging and forensics (they are a really good rubberduck!), but apart from that they're pretty much useless because after two prompts they will keep forgetting if/elseif/else conditions, and to check those boundaries is the mission of the unlucky person that has to merge that slopcode later.
I don't understand how we got from TDD and test case based engineering to this bullshit. It's like everyone in power was the wrong person to be in that position in the first place, and that statistically no lead engineers ever will be a C-staff or SVP or whatever corporate manager level.
While the AI bubble is bursting, I will continue to develop with TDD practices to test my code. Which, in return, has the benefit of being able to use LLMs to create nice templates as a reasonable starting point.
Maybe developers are using it in a less visible way? In the past 6 months I've used AI for a lot of different things. Some highlights: - Built a windows desktop app that scans local folders for videos and automatically transcribes the audio, summarises the content into a structured JSON format based on screenshots and subtitles, and automatically categorises each video. I used it on my PC to scan a couple of TB of vi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Let me guess ... they're holding it wrong, and the model they're using is older than 20 minutes.
You’re assuming how i would respond before i even respond. Please allow inquiries to happen naturally without polluting the thread with meritless cynicism.
FWIW, my own experiences with AI have ranged from mediocre to downright abysmal. And, no, I don't know which models the tools were using. I'm rather annoyed that it seems to be impossible to express a negative opinion about the value of AI without having to have a thoroughly documented experiment that inevitably invites the response that obviously some parameter was chosen incorrectly, while the people claiming how good it is get to be all offended when someone asks them to maybe show their work a little bit.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree that if there are productivity gains that everyone should benefit, but the only thing that would allow this to happen are systems and incentive structures that allow that to happen. A manager's job is to increase revenue and cut costs, that's how they get their job, how they keep their job, and how they are promoted. People very rarely get free benefits outside the range of what the incentive structures they…
> I agree that if there are productivity gains that everyone should benefit And if they don't, then you'd understand the anger surely. You can't say "well obviously everybody should benefit" and then also scold the people who are mad that everybody isn't benefiting.