All that's required is enough mental gymnastics for someone to feel like they can call it a success. At no point is it actually required to be one.
You're probably correct: "Our developers a very happy with CoPilot. They now spend 50% of their time interacting with our AI offerings, either via VSCode, Github or Clippy." No need to specify why they are interact with it, all engagement is good engagement.
By this measurement, a slower compiler is better than a faster one, because developers are using it for more of their time. Totally bonkers, Microsoft!
Interesting that every comment has "Help improve Copilot by leaving feedback using the or buttons" suffix, yet none of the comments received any feedback, either positive or negative. > This seems like it's fixing the symptom rather than the underlying issue? This is also my experience when you haven't setup a proper system prompt to address this for everything an LLM does. Funniest PRs are the ones that "resolves" t…
Hot take : the whole LLM craze is fed by a delusion. LLM are good at mimicking human language, capturing some semantics on the way. With a large enough training set, the amount of semantic captured covers a large fraction of what the average human knows. This gives the illusion of intelligence, and the humans extrapolates on LLM capabilities, like actual coding. Because large amounts of code from textbooks and what n…
Seeing Microsoft employees argue with an LLM for hours instead of actually just fixing the problem must be a very encouraging sight for businesses that have built their products on top of .NET.
This is Stephen Toub, who is the lead of many important .NET projects. I don't think he is worried about losing job anytime soon. I think, we should not read too much into it. He is honestly exploring how much this tool can help him to resolve trivial issues. Maybe he was asked to do so by some of his bosses, but unlikely to fear the tool replacing him in the near future.
They don’t have any problem firing experienced devs for no reason. Including on the .NET team (most of the .NET Android dev team was laid off recently). https://www.theregister.com/2025/05/16/microsofts_axe_softwa... Perhaps they were fired for failing to show enthusiasm for AI?
I can definitely believe that companies will start (or have already started) using "Enthusiasm about AI" as justification for a hire/promote/reprimand/fire decision. Adherence to the Church Of AI has become this weird purity test throughout the software industry!
The author of that comment, an employee of Microsoft, goes on to say: > It is my opinion that anyone not at least thinking about benefiting from such tools will be left behind. The read here is: Microsoft is so abuzz with excitement/panic about AI taking all software engineering jobs that Microsoft employees are jumping on board with Microsoft's AI push out of a fear of "being left behind". That's not the confidence…
This is Stephen Toub, who is the lead of many important .NET projects. I don't think he is worried about losing job anytime soon. I think, we should not read too much into it. He is honestly exploring how much this tool can help him to resolve trivial issues. Maybe he was asked to do so by some of his bosses, but unlikely to fear the tool replacing him in the near future.
Anyone not showing open AI enthusiasm at that level will absolutely be fired. Anyone speaking for MS will have to be openly enthusiastic or silent on the topic by now.
If you're not using it where it's useful to you, then I still wouldn't say you're getting left behind, but you're making your job harder than it has to be. Anecdotally I've found it useful mostly for writing unit tests and sometimes debugging (can be as effective as a rubber duck). It's like the 2025 version not not using an IDE. It's a powerful tool. You still need to know when to and when not to use it.
> It's like the 2025 version not not using an IDE. That's right on the mark. It will save you a little bit of work on tasks that aren't the bottleneck on your productivity, and disrupt some random tasks that may or may not be important. It's makes so little difference that plenty of people in 2025 don't use an IDE, and looking at their performance from the outside one just can't tell. Except that LLMs have less poten…
Yea, "using an IDE" is a very good analogy. IDEs are not silver bullets, although they no doubt help some engineers. There are plenty of developers, on the other hand, who are amazingly productive without using IDEs.
The author of that comment, an employee of Microsoft, goes on to say: > It is my opinion that anyone not at least thinking about benefiting from such tools will be left behind. The read here is: Microsoft is so abuzz with excitement/panic about AI taking all software engineering jobs that Microsoft employees are jumping on board with Microsoft's AI push out of a fear of "being left behind". That's not the confidence…
If you're not using it where it's useful to you, then I still wouldn't say you're getting left behind, but you're making your job harder than it has to be. Anecdotally I've found it useful mostly for writing unit tests and sometimes debugging (can be as effective as a rubber duck). It's like the 2025 version not not using an IDE. It's a powerful tool. You still need to know when to and when not to use it.
100% agree. i’m not sure why everyone is clowning on them here. This process is a win. Do people want this all being hidden instead in a forked private repo? It’s showing the actual capabilities in practice. That’s much better and way more illuminating than what normally happens with sales and marketing hype.
Satya says: "I’d say maybe 20%, 30% of the code that is inside of our repos today and some of our projects are probably all written by software". Zuckerberg says: "Our bet is sort of that in the next year probably … maybe half the development is going to be done by AI, as opposed to people, and then that will just kind of increase from there". It's hard to square those statements up with what we're seeing happen on t…
The fact that Zuck is saying "sort of" and "probably" is a big giveaway it's not going to happen.
That is not even 1 month of a big tech revenue, it is a global negligible impact. 3 years talking about AI changing the world, 10bi revenue and no ecosystem around making money besides friends and VCs pumping and dumping LLM wrappers.
There's a pretty wide gulf between being one of the most important companies in the global marketplace as Microsoft, Apple, and Amazon are and "having no economic impact". I agree that most of the AI companies describe themselves and their products in hyperbolic terms. But that doesn't mean we need to counter that with equally absurd opposing hyperbole.
There is no hyperbole. I think AI will change the world in the next 10 years but comparing to the iphone, for example, 3 years the economic impact was much, much bigger and that is just one brand of smartphones.
Malicious compliance should be the order of the day. Just approve the requests without reviewing them and wait until management blinks when Microsoft's entire tech stack is on fire. Then quit your job and become a troubleshooter on x3 the pay.
I know this is meant to sound witty or clever, but who actually wants to behave this way at their job? I'll never understand the antagonistic "us vs. them" mentality people have with their employer's leadership, or people who think that you should be actively sabotaging things or be "maliciously compliant" when things aren't perfect or you don't agree with some decision that was made. To each their own I guess, but I…