41–50 of 108 posts
>And with those new skills, your old skills will start to atrophy. Skills don't work like muscles, please stop with this thinking model of the world. No one is going to fire you because you don't have the same speed of recall of language constructs and have to look more things up. Speed of coding is not the damn bottleneck. Plus have a little faith in your brain that you could get back to that point if you wanted to.
Often I'll ask the AI to do something and it goes sideways. Sometimes it really saves me time, but many times not. I'll break down and actually type out commands or even Google what to do instead of using the AI because it's still faster.
It's true that my trainee uses the AI more because there's fewer commands in his muscle memory. But, it's still not great yet.
Further, the AI must have each one of its actions approved. I've tried fully automatic mode. It's bad.
AI is more like a lawn mower. It's self-propelling, but you still have to hold on to it, sometimes you got to turn it off and just pull the stuff out of its way or it gets stuck.
I'm so fucking tired of people who had no interest in software development telling me software development is dead. The author repeatedly states they have little knowledge of the tech they're using. But they're CERTAIN in what the industry will be in future. Hubris
“Oh you’ll never have to do this tech stuff ever again! How amazing! Ai all the things!”
Like, ok great. Good for you. Leave the rest of us out of whatever mission-to-replace-some-thing-you-don’t-like.
Or even better, if you don’t like, go away and do something else. I’m not big into jogging, but I don’t go around telling runners that their hobby is redundant and that “nobody will run now that we have segways”.
Wait, what?
> I was never particularly interested in the code itself
> Instead, I was always more interested in the product
Confusing contradictions aside, I had trouble engaging with this article.
The author seems to think every developer thinks like they do. Some people actually enjoy helping their business/users.
The author also has trouble imagining other perspectives as a people manager. From the linked article,
> I do not get any sort of high from managing people. I don’t think anyone gets that same high from this role
Hate to break it to the author again, but some people actually enjoy seeing those they mentor/manage succeed.
Being a people manager isn’t the right fit for everyone. Perhaps being a developer in the next 20, 5, or 1 year won’t be the right fit for the same people it is for today.
Don't worry, there's still more coding problems after that one is solved by AI, because the "last 10%" is another 90% of work when it comes to polishing.
>And with those new skills, your old skills will start to atrophy. Skills don't work like muscles, please stop with this thinking model of the world. No one is going to fire you because you don't have the same speed of recall of language constructs and have to look more things up. Speed of coding is not the damn bottleneck. Plus have a little faith in your brain that you could get back to that point if you wanted to.
Skills 100% atrophy.
> There is a popular argument that a software developer’s job is not write software but to solve a user’s problem. Bullshit Wait, what? > I was never particularly interested in the code itself > Instead, I was always more interested in the product Confusing contradictions aside, I had trouble engaging with this article. The author seems to think every developer thinks like they do. Some people actually enjoy helping…
Author assumes we’re going to use AI more and more. I don’t agree. I regularly out perform the AI pushers on my team and I can talk about engineering in person too!
To me, the more interesting question is whether you without AI can outperform you using AI, not whether you can outperform someone else who is using AI. I think AI has already gotten to a point to where it can help skilled devs be more productive.
Not really. The nice thing about knowing when to do something is you can just turn off your brain when typing code of thinks about architecture in the meanwhile. Then you just run the linter for syntax mistakes and you're golden. Zero to no mental load.
And if you've been in the same job for years, you have mental landmarks all over the codebase, the internal documentation, and the documentation of the dependencies. Your brains runs much faster than your finger, so it's faster to figure out where the bug is and write the few lines of code that fixes it (or the single character replacement). The rest of the time is thinking about where similar issues may be and if you've not impacted something down the line (aka caring about quality).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I have tested this. I have been coding for close to 20 years, in anything from web to embedded. I got tired of hearing about vibe coding day in and day out, so I gave in, and I tried everything under the sun. For the first few days, I started to see the hype. I was much faster at coding, I thought, I can just type this small prompt to the LLM and it will do what I wanted, much faster than I could have. It worked! I d…
AI writes code according to the instructions given. You can instruct it to architect and organize the code any way you want. You got the fruit of your inarticulation.
Nope. The factors are your prompt, the thousand of lines of system prompts, whatever bugs may exist inside the generator system, and the weights born from the examples in the data which can be truly atrocious.
The user is only partially in control (a minimal part of that). With standard programming workflow, the output are deterministic so you can reason out the system's behavior and truly be in control.