Live data from Hacker News

Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

standupforme.app

61–70 of 122 posts

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#61
post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Another way to look at this is that AI coding agents take the fun out of a software engineer's job. Completely backwards - the fun in the job should be to solve problems and come up with solutions. The fun in the job is not knowing where to place a semicolon.

Exactly, the fun part is when the code works and does what you wanted it to do. Writing code itself is not fun. People forget this because they get small wins / dopamine hits along the way, a clever function, an elegant few lines of code, a bug fix, but the majority of that time coding is just a grind until the end where you get the big dopamine hit.

Fun is not measured objectively. Different people find different things fun. I enjoy writing code very much (in addition to solving big problems; one can enjoy both).

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#62
post #2

> The role change has been described by some as becoming a sort of software engineering manager, where one writes little or no code oneself but instead supervises a team of AI coding agents as if they are a team of human junior software engineers.... > In reality, though, the code review load for software engineers will gradually increase as fewer and fewer of them are expected to supervise an ever-growing number of…

I like programming for fun, but professional software engineering has never been more than very occasionally fun to me. I do it because it pays well.

Most companies use some variant of the sprint/"agile" methodology, which means that you as the programmer are similar to an assembly line worker. You don't control the pace, you rarely get the chance to actually finish anything as much as you would like to so you don't get the satisfaction of a finished product, you get little downtime in between tickets or projects to feel a sense of satisfaction at what you have done before you move on to something else.

I totally understand why businesses operate this way. It's simple: if you try not to operate this way, you increase the likelihood that your competitors will release more rapidly and take all your market share. It's the basic evolutionary logic. If you can release a decent but buggy product six months faster than the competitor can release a better and less buggy product, there is a good chance that you will drive them out of business. It all makes sense, but it doesn't result in a pleasant experience for me as a programmer.

The job is also very sedentary and it puts stress on your eyes and your hands. Of course I'm not going to compare myself to a coal miner, but the fact remains that in its own ways the job is more rough on the body than some people might expect. Meanwhile the intellectual and constantly changing nature of the field means that you can never rest on your laurels - the job requires constant mental engagement. It's hard to do it well while multitasking and thinking about other interesting things at the same time.

If jobs in this field did not pay so well, I don't think I'd ever even consider doing this as a career. It just doesn't have nearly enough upsides for me. The only upside I can think of besides the money is that you get to spend time interacting with intelligent people. But one can get that in other places.

Coding with the help of AI is a big improvement for me because just automating away the boilerplate and greatly reducing the time that needs to be spent in doing reading, research and experimentation already takes away some of the main time-sinks of the job. And while I appreciate code's deterministic and logical elegance, I've written more than enough code in my life to not miss writing it directly. I also enjoy writing English, after all. It's refreshing for me to spend my time composing precise English instructions for the AI instead of writing in a programming language. My English skills are above average, so this also helps me to leverage one of my talents that had previously been underutilized. Well, my English skills always came in handy when I needed to talk to coworkers or managers, but I meant that they had been underutilized in the act of actually creating software.

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#63
> I recognize that it is reminiscent of a few decades ago when old timers complained about the proliferation of high level programming languages and insisted they would lead to a generation of programmers lacking a proper understanding of how the system behaves beneath all that syntactic sugar and automatic garbage collection. They won’t have the foundational skills necessary to design and build quality software. And, for the most part, they turned out to be wrong.

What if the old timers were actually right? I tend to think they were.

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#64
Honest question: Is inference actually being sold at a loss? I.e. does inference itself cost more to run than we're being charged, or are the companies operating at a loss because they're spending more on training than the margins they get from inference?

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#65
post #38
post #2

> The role change has been described by some as becoming a sort of software engineering manager, where one writes little or no code oneself but instead supervises a team of AI coding agents as if they are a team of human junior software engineers.... > In reality, though, the code review load for software engineers will gradually increase as fewer and fewer of them are expected to supervise an ever-growing number of…

I think it depends on what you find enjoyable. I think people who like the tinkering and the actual act of coding, debugging, etc. will find it less and less fun to be in this area, but people who like to look at the big picture, and solve problems, will see that they will now be better at both getting overview of larger and larger codebases and that technical debt that was never attainable to solve before can now be…

The best way to have a big picture view of a project is to build a mental model of that project in your head. Coding with LLMs removes that ability, and replaces it with an illusion.

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#66
post #5
post #2

> The role change has been described by some as becoming a sort of software engineering manager, where one writes little or no code oneself but instead supervises a team of AI coding agents as if they are a team of human junior software engineers.... > In reality, though, the code review load for software engineers will gradually increase as fewer and fewer of them are expected to supervise an ever-growing number of…

Sounds a lot like "self-driving" cars - "they are good enough 95%+ of the time, you’re not going to pay as much attention as you should". Same thing happens here, you get complacent and miss critical failures or problems. It's also similar in that it "take[s away] many of the fun parts". When I can focus on simply driving it can be engaging and enjoyable - no matter the road or traffic or whatever.

>Sounds a lot like "self-driving" cars - "they are good enough 95%+ of the time, you’re not going to pay as much attention as you should".

That might be an issue for supervised "self-driving" cars (eg. tesla FSD), but not really applicable to self driving cars as a whole. Waymo seems to be doing just fine for instance.

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#67

The more immediate uncomfortable truth for me is that my company is requiring all developers to use LLMs, and laying off developers who won't make the switch. I'm not sure that "LLM-based AI coding agents have no place now, or ever, in generating production code for any software I build professionally" is a decision that most of us will have a choice in.

You're right about that. It's something I should have addressed in the original article, but I don't really have a solution for those who aren't self-employed. Maybe just use up a bunch of tokens on junk tasks while continuing to secretly write the code yourself? It's super wasteful, but do what you have to do to survive until the bubble pops.

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#68
post #6

i was kinda hoping for TFA to finally produce some research outputs or even statistics, but sadly the `uncomfortable truths` are your usual vague talking points.

Sorry, I realize the headline perhaps implies something with more rigour than it actually delivers. I'm pretty new to writing blog posts! But if you want some actual factual data, you seriously should read Ed Zitron's blog: https://www.wheresyoured.at/

Re: Some uncomfortable truths about AI coding agents

#69
post #66
post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sounds a lot like "self-driving" cars - "they are good enough 95%+ of the time, you’re not going to pay as much attention as you should". Same thing happens here, you get complacent and miss critical failures or problems. It's also similar in that it "take[s away] many of the fun parts". When I can focus on simply driving it can be engaging and enjoyable - no matter the road or traffic or whatever.

>Sounds a lot like "self-driving" cars - "they are good enough 95%+ of the time, you’re not going to pay as much attention as you should". That might be an issue for supervised "self-driving" cars (eg. tesla FSD), but not really applicable to self driving cars as a whole. Waymo seems to be doing just fine for instance.

Exactly why I put "self-driving" in quotes. Right now AI assisted coding might generally be at the equivalent of Level-2 or -3 self-driving. Getting to autonomous coding agents will be like the step change that is Level-4 or -5 driving.
Post reply on HN