Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

elma.dev

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

441–450 of 481 posts

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#441

Post by WalterSear »

yeasku wrote: post #424
Ensorceled wrote: post #298

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is what I've been finding. Currently, if I have a junior level task, I take the email I would have sent to a junior developer explaining what I want and give it to ChatGPT/Claude/etc and get a reasonably good solution that needs as many feedback loops as the junior dev would have needed. Except I got that solution in a few minutes.

I have been reading this here since 2021. At the same time it gets better every day. But I cant hire a company to create software for me 10 times faster and cheaper than 5 years ago. I am so tired of lies.

It's quite simple: Nobody is lying and nobody who is any good is going to be nickle and dimed at a chop shop for long.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#442

Post by thirdsun »

godelski wrote: post #327
bayarearefugee wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which will (sadly) offer you zero extrinsic benefit at almost every job, and will often actually count against you as a waste of time relative to the vast majority of productivity metrics that companies actually use.

There's a lot of benefits you get by mentoring. When you have to teach you're forced to think more deeply about problems, see it from different angles, and revisit questions you had when learning but tabled at that time. That last one is pretty common. There's always questions you have when learning that you have to avoid because you don't have the knowledge to answer yet, because they would take you down too deep a…

I don't think you have to convince the parent poster or seniors developers in general. You have to convince their employers that this is a valuable use of time.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#443

Post by yeasku »

WalterSear wrote: post #441
yeasku wrote: post #424

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have been reading this here since 2021. At the same time it gets better every day. But I cant hire a company to create software for me 10 times faster and cheaper than 5 years ago. I am so tired of lies.

It's quite simple: Nobody is lying and nobody who is any good is going to be nickle and dimed at a chop shop for long.

What? Where is all the software made by ai?

Where are the videogames?

Where is the Office killer?

If ai enables you people so much I would expect software making to have skyroketed.

It has nor happend.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#444

Post by WalterSear »

yeasku wrote: post #443
WalterSear wrote: post #441

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's quite simple: Nobody is lying and nobody who is any good is going to be nickle and dimed at a chop shop for long.

What? Where is all the software made by ai? Where are the videogames? Where is the Office killer? If ai enables you people so much I would expect software making to have skyroketed. It has nor happend.

I don't know, I don't entirely understand it either, but I think people are just impatient. AI coding has only hit it's stride in the last ~6 months. And there's a huge part of the business process that isn't coding, isn't necessarily amenable to being sped up.

All I can tell you is that it's happening right now, every day, on my desk. I am part of that software explosion that you can't see.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#445

Post by AndrewDucker »

johntash wrote: post #400
AndrewDucker wrote: post #350

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If you "don't know" then how could you have "easily verified it was correct"?

I think they were claiming claude easily verified it? i.e. they have total faith in claude to not mess up

That's an interesting claim. I wonder how they would come to believe that.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#446

Post by Ntrails »

roarcher wrote: post #374
tlonny wrote: post #355

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The rank disrespect of somebody asking you to review something they haven't even looked at is eye watering. I feel like AI-induced brain-rot of engineers is inevitable. Unless we see AI leapfrog into something close to AGI in the future (certainly not ruling this out), I think there will be very lucrative careers available to engineers who can maintain a balanced relationship with AI.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets viscerally irritated when I'm asked to review a PR that was obviously generated. You didn't take the time to write this code, but you expect me to take the time make sure it's correct, which will take far longer than a regular PR because there's no reason to assume an LLM even understood the task. Next time just be honest and ask me to do your work for you.

> You didn't take the time to write this code, but you expect me to take the time make sure it's correct

So, I guess there are a couple parts here right? I might not take the time to write the code, but surely I am on the hook to demonstrate that I've tested the code or have very good reason to believe it's correct?

If people are pushing PRs [of any meaningful complexity] without knowing whether they work in the general case that sounds like a failure of process and/or training. For me PRs are about catching edges?

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#447

Post by roarcher »

Ntrails wrote: post #446
roarcher wrote: post #374

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I'm glad I'm not the only one who gets viscerally irritated when I'm asked to review a PR that was obviously generated. You didn't take the time to write this code, but you expect me to take the time make sure it's correct, which will take far longer than a regular PR because there's no reason to assume an LLM even understood the task. Next time just be honest and ask me to do your work for you.

> You didn't take the time to write this code, but you expect me to take the time make sure it's correct So, I guess there are a couple parts here right? I might not take the time to write the code, but surely I am on the hook to demonstrate that I've tested the code or have very good reason to believe it's correct? If people are pushing PRs [of any meaningful complexity] without knowing whether they work in the gene…

I'll quote from my parent comment:

> somebody asking you to review something they haven't even looked at

The situation you're talking about is not the one we're talking about, so I'm not sure what you're taking issue with.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#449

Post by exe34 »

hamandcheese wrote: post #417
exe34 wrote: post #387

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You can also simply start without Claude too!

Yes, but less often.

Yes, because Claude makes you feel more productive and thus you are more eager. I feel like we've covered this further up.

Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?

#450

Post by jacquesm »

Hilift wrote: post #437
jacquesm wrote: post #4

For the same reason that an amateur with a powertool ends up in the emergency room and a seasoned pro knows which way to point the business end. AI is in many ways a powertool, if you don't know what you are doing it will help you to do that much more efficiently. If you do know what you are doing it will do the same.

Supposedly in the US there are 25,000 emergency room visits per year for chainsaw injuries. Or that is what AI wants us to think, so it can take all the good chainsaw jobs.

Doesn't suprise me one bit, but I am surprised it is that low.
Post reply on HN