FreeBSD doesn't have Wi-Fi driver for my old MacBook, so AI built one for me

Post by ang_cire » Wed, Feb 25, 2026, 10:36 AM UTC

reactordev wrote: post #347

ang_cire wrote: post #340

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is only true at the start. The quality will always be lower for a new product/ production line, because 1) it hasn't had the time to iterate that got the established, big-name producers to where they are, and 2) it democratizes the market to allow for lower-quality version that weren't fiscally feasible under a more complex (and thus expensive) manufacturing/ production base. But after the market normalizes, it…

Thus creating a concentration on which is the best personal Google clone and thus, creating another Google. Walled paywall and all. It’s a cycle. Free and open marketplace, crapware. Crapware for long enough, goodware. Goodware so good, it needs hardware, it needs integrations, it solves world hunger, but no one uses anything else anymore. No, the best are marketplaces that are open but moderated for quality.

Post by empthought » Wed, Feb 25, 2026, 2:08 PM UTC

nitwit005 wrote: post #381

empthought wrote: post #378

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don’t think that follows, nor do I think it will keep improving indefinitely. It will certainly continue to improve for a while. We don’t need anything close to AGI to render the job “software engineer” as we know it today completely obsolete. Ever hear of a lorimer?

If it doesn't follow, why not? The other possibility is, as you say, progress slows down before its better than humans. But then how is it replacing them? How does a worse horse replace horses?

Post by varankinv » Wed, Feb 25, 2026, 9:46 PM UTC

irishcoffee wrote: post #375

varankinv wrote: post #361

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I was personally surprised when the agent debugged kernel panics caused by its own code (many times by now). It just iterates from the stack traces and crash dumps. The nice part is that, when you do see that the code smells — you ask the agent to rework it, focusing on specific problems. This is just code, and you don't need to dance around, hoping that AI will spill some "magic" at you.

> The nice part is that, when you do see that the code smells — you ask the agent to rework it, focusing on specific problems. I think that is the crux of the problem. How do you know code smell if you don't write it, and you don't read it? I'm pretty confident the spdx header isn't correct even.

Post by veunes » Mon, Mar 02, 2026, 11:22 AM UTC

varankinv wrote: post #361

veunes wrote: post #344

Earlier quoted context omitted.

To be fair if you open up driver source code from the vendors themselves, it's often the same hell with magic numbers and lack of checks because "we know what the hardware will return". But you're right on the main point: AI writes C like a very confident junior who skipped memory safety lectures - it copies the style, but not the discipline. It works as long as you're on the "happy path", but debugging a kernel pani…

I was personally surprised when the agent debugged kernel panics caused by its own code (many times by now). It just iterates from the stack traces and crash dumps. The nice part is that, when you do see that the code smells — you ask the agent to rework it, focusing on specific problems. This is just code, and you don't need to dance around, hoping that AI will spill some "magic" at you.