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

Everyone in Seattle hates AI

jonready.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

571–580 of 1001 posts

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#571

Post by skissane »

torginus wrote: post #500
josephg wrote: post #421

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well yeah. And because when an expert looks at the code chatgpt produces, the flaws are more obvious. It programs with the skill of the median programmer on GitHub. For beginners and people who do cookie cutter work, this can be incredible because it writes the same or better code they could write, fast and for free. But for experts, the code it produces is consistently worse than what we can do. At best my pride dem…

In my experience (with ChatGPT 5.1 as of late) is that the AI follows a problem->solution internal logic and doesn't think and try to structure its code. If you ask for an endpoint to a CRUD API, it'll make one. If you ask for 5, it'll repeat the same code 5 times and modify it for the use case. A dev wouldn't do this, they would try to figure out the common parts of code, pull them out into helpers, and try to make…

> If you ask for an endpoint to a CRUD API, it'll make one. If you ask for 5, it'll repeat the same code 5 times and modify it for the use case.

I don’t think this is an inherent issue to the technology. Duplicate code detectors have been around for ages. Given an AI agent a tool which calls one, and ask it to reduce duplication, it will start refactoring.

Of course, there is a risk of going too far in the other direction-refactorings which technically reduce duplication but which have unacceptable costs (you can be too DRY). But some possible solutions: (a) ask it to judge if the refactoring is worth it or not - if it judges no, just ignore the duplication and move on; (b) get a human to review the decision in (a); (c) if AI repeatedly makes wrong decision (according to human), prompt engineering, or maybe even just some hardcoded heuristics

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#572

Post by anukin »

CSMastermind wrote: post #223
pkasting wrote: post #40

Ex-Google here; there are many people both current and past-Google that feel the same way as the composite coworker in the linked post. I haven't escaped this mindset myself. I'm convinced there are a small number of places where LLMs make truly effective tools (see: generation of "must be plausible, need not be accurate" data, e.g. concept art or crowd animations in movies), a large number of places where LLMs make…

My friends at Google are some of the most negative about the potential of AI to improve software development. I was always surprised by this and assumed internally at Google would be one of the first places to adopt these.

You cannot trust someone’s judgement on something if that something can result in them being unemployed.

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#573

Post by myfavoritedog »

scotty79 wrote: post #476
yoyohello13 wrote: post #300

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Google has good engineers. Generally I've noticed the better someone is at coding the more critical they are of AI generated code. Which make sense honestly. It's easier to spot flaws the more expert you are. This doesn't mean they don't use AI gen code, just they are more careful with when an where.

It works both ways. If you are good, it's also easier to spot moments of brilliance from AI agent when it saves you hours of googling, reading docs, some trial and error while you pour yourself cup of coffee and ponder the next steps. You can spot when a single tab press saved you minutes.

[dead]

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#575

Post by almosthere »

I think we should be honest and consistent about losing our jobs to AI. For decades we justified automation by saying things like: "Sure, the toothpaste tube machine replaced 30 workers, but someone will need to maintain and operate it." And whenever someone pointed out that one mechanic doesn't replace those 30 lost jobs, everyone went quiet.

Now we're using the same logic again: "Well, you just need to learn to use the AI before someone else does."

And if anyone doubts that the world can move on without the software engineer, remember that it moved on just fine after eliminating the toothpaste tube fillers. The world kept turning, just a little colder and more indifferent each time another role disappeared.

Maybe instead of pretending this time is different, we should focus on writing the best epitaph we can.

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#576

Post by stogot »

> And then came the final insult: everyone was forced to use Microsoft's AI tools whether they worked or not.

Copilot for Word. Copilot for PowerPoint. Copilot for email. Copilot for code. Worse than the tools they replaced. Worse than competitors' tools. Sometimes worse than doing the work manually.

This is revolting. Three years ago I’d have said this is a terrible black mirror plot

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#577

Post by llbeansandrice »

anukin wrote: post #572
CSMastermind wrote: post #223

Earlier quoted context omitted.

My friends at Google are some of the most negative about the potential of AI to improve software development. I was always surprised by this and assumed internally at Google would be one of the first places to adopt these.

You cannot trust someone’s judgement on something if that something can result in them being unemployed.

Or if they stand to make a lot of money.

See both sides can be pithy.

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#578

Post by ta9000 »

CSMastermind wrote: post #223
pkasting wrote: post #40

Ex-Google here; there are many people both current and past-Google that feel the same way as the composite coworker in the linked post. I haven't escaped this mindset myself. I'm convinced there are a small number of places where LLMs make truly effective tools (see: generation of "must be plausible, need not be accurate" data, e.g. concept art or crowd animations in movies), a large number of places where LLMs make…

My friends at Google are some of the most negative about the potential of AI to improve software development. I was always surprised by this and assumed internally at Google would be one of the first places to adopt these.

[dead]

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#579

Post by YZF »

nikkwong wrote: post #548
sirreal14 wrote: post #65

As a Seattle SWE, I'd say most of my coworkers do hate all the time-wasting AI stuff being shoved down our throats. There are a few evangelical AI boosters I do work with, but I keep catching mistakes in their code that they didn't used to make. Large suites of elegant looking unit tests, but the unit tests include large amounts of code duplicating functionality of the test framework for no reason, and I've even seen…

As another Seattle SWE, I'll go against the grain and say that I think AI is going to change the nature of the market for labor for SWE's and my guess would be for the negative. People need to remember that the ability of AI in code generation today is the worst that it ever will be, and it's only going to improve from here. If you were to just judge by the sentiment on HN, you would think no coder worth their weight…

I keep getting blown away by AI (specifically Claude Code with the latest models). What it does is literally science fiction. If you told someone 5 years ago that AI can find and fix a bug in some complex code with almost zero human intervention nobody would believe you, but this is the reality today. It can find bugs, it can fix bugs, it can refactor code, it can write code. Yes, not perfect, but with a well organized code base, and with careful prompting, it rivals humans in many tasks (certainly outperforms them in some aspects).

As you're also saying this is the worst it will ever be. There is only one direction, the question is the acceleration/velocity.

Where I'm not sure I agree is with the perception this automatically means we're all going to be out of a job. It's possible there would be more software engineering jobs. It's not clear. Someone still has to catch the bad approaches, the big mistakes, etc. There is going to be a lot more software produced with these tools than ever.

Re: Everyone in Seattle hates AI

#580

Post by llbeansandrice »

dwaltrip wrote: post #153
suprjami wrote: post #104

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't see it that way. Tabs, spaces, curly brace placement, Vim, Emacs, VSCode, etc are largely aesthetic choices with some marginal unproven cognitive implications. I find people mostly prefer what they are used to, and if your preference was so superior then how could so many people build fantastic software using the method you don't like? AI isn't like that. AI is a bunch of people telling me this product can do…

You can vibe-code a throwaway UI for investigating some complex data in less than 30 minutes. The code quality doesn't matter, and it will make your life much easier. Rinse and repeat for many "one-off" tasks. It's not going away, you need to learn how to use it. shrugs shoulders

You should try telling management it’s throwaway
Post reply on HN