261–268 of 268 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ok if we measure uptime of the software I’ve written it’s far higher than 99%.
Again, we're not measuring uptime. We're measuring how many of them had at least one bug.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I am also building an agent framework and also used chat coding (not vibe coding) to generate work - I was easily able to save 50% of my time just by asking GPT. But it generates mistakes like say 1 in 10 times and I do not see it getting fixed unless we drastically change the LLM architecture. In future I am sure we will have much more robust systems if the current hype cycle doesn't ruin its trust with devs. But th…
I just left my CTO job for personal reasons. we tried coding agents, agentic coding, LLM-driven coding whatever. the code any of these generate is subpar (a junior would get the PR rejected for what it produces) and you just waste so much time prompting and not thinking. people don't know the code anymore, don't check the code and it's all just gotten very sloppy. so not hiring coders because of AI is a dangerous thi…
If done right we all code through spec written in English, not code.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Don't tell management about this, as they're all betting the house on AI agents next year.
Only one of these outcomes will be correct, so worth putting money on it if you think they're wrong a la The Big Short.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just left my CTO job for personal reasons. we tried coding agents, agentic coding, LLM-driven coding whatever. the code any of these generate is subpar (a junior would get the PR rejected for what it produces) and you just waste so much time prompting and not thinking. people don't know the code anymore, don't check the code and it's all just gotten very sloppy. so not hiring coders because of AI is a dangerous thi…
You are misunderstanding coding vs logic. Coding is making our logic (which is creativity) fit into someone else's syntax. If a machine is able to translate your logic expressed in your language into running code, whats wrong? Common thats our dream isn't it? Its like you not using calculator because you are worried kids won't learn how to divide. Is assembly language better than C++? Yes - did that prevented high le…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You are misunderstanding coding vs logic. Coding is making our logic (which is creativity) fit into someone else's syntax. If a machine is able to translate your logic expressed in your language into running code, whats wrong? Common thats our dream isn't it? Its like you not using calculator because you are worried kids won't learn how to divide. Is assembly language better than C++? Yes - did that prevented high le…
Your comment is tangental at best. You're projecting quite a lot tbh. I'm saying: the stuff it produces is shit and we don't have any connection to the outcome anymore, because our brain goes into "watching TV mode". So the outcome is garbage in any sense.
Not everyone has that opinion. I am not talking about non programmers jumping on the bandwagon but real technologists using it in real world programming [1].
> our brain goes into "watching TV mode"
How many people would have thought the same when calculator came? We can either think like - oh this tool is making kids dumb or you can think like the new tool can make them faster and efficient.
>Enterprise systems aren't clean APIs waiting for AI agents to orchestrate them. They're legacy systems with quirks, partial failure modes, authentication flows that change without notice, rate limits that vary by time of day, and compliance requirements that don't fit neatly into prompt templates. Perhaps that's why MCP as a protocol is so interesting to people - MCP servers are a chance at a 'blank slate' in front…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your comment is tangental at best. You're projecting quite a lot tbh. I'm saying: the stuff it produces is shit and we don't have any connection to the outcome anymore, because our brain goes into "watching TV mode". So the outcome is garbage in any sense.
>the stuff it produces is shit Not everyone has that opinion. I am not talking about non programmers jumping on the bandwagon but real technologists using it in real world programming [1]. > our brain goes into "watching TV mode" How many people would have thought the same when calculator came? We can either think like - oh this tool is making kids dumb or you can think like the new tool can make them faster and effi…
I am talking from my point of view. I am quite experienced and know what I'm doing in a lot of areas, having 18 years of experience. I am faster without agents, produce better code, know the code and can guarantee maintainability and less bugs. Why on earth would I change that? That it's going to get better in the future is a hypothetical which needs to be proven yet.
It is not a calculator tho. So stop with that nonsensical comparison already. You know exactly what I'm talking about and you're not arguing against my point. That's why I'm saing that your comment ins tangental. LLMs are not a calculator. My point is that LLMs make us neither faster nor more efficient. You trade quality and maintainability (slob) against quality. That's a different trade off and makes the two outcomes uncomparable.