91–100 of 233 posts
This really hit home for me: In some cases, workers are also being asked to automate the parts of their jobs they enjoy most, Hinds said on the podcast, pointing to customer-service employees who enjoy building relationships but are increasingly expected to supervise AI agents instead. "That's what gives you joy and meaning at work," she said. "That is very dangerous." What's a 20% productivity gain if I constantly f…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Your experience pretty much mirrors my own. I hate to be the 'they're holding it wrong' guy but there's certainly a lot of people out there that have no real idea how to effectively leverage AI.
That’s a problem with the tool not the people. AI is marketed literally as writing one sentence and having some app perfectly output. Just check any of the landing pages for Claude code or codex or GitHub copilot…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
When I was given a semi-ultimatum "use AI or get fired" kind of thing for writing code I had a brief bout of depression/sadness. Whereas my friend doesn't care/says "I get paid to not work". I have gotten past it, now I'm just like, I'll do what I need to do to get paid since unfortunately I'm in a lot of debt so I need this job. I learned to code in 2013 so I like typing the code myself but now it seems like a waste…
FWIW, I was just like you but then completely gave in and found enjoyment in the act of simply ideating and shipping. The gap now between idea and implementation is so small. At first I was depressed but now I'm in the acceptance phase of grief. We aren't going back, for better or for worse.
> Jeb: "If everybody's got one of these auto-whatsits, does anybody code anymore?"
> Doc Brown: "Of course we code. But for recreation. For fun."
> Jeb: "Code for fun? What the hell kind of fun is that?"
This really hit home for me: In some cases, workers are also being asked to automate the parts of their jobs they enjoy most, Hinds said on the podcast, pointing to customer-service employees who enjoy building relationships but are increasingly expected to supervise AI agents instead. "That's what gives you joy and meaning at work," she said. "That is very dangerous." What's a 20% productivity gain if I constantly f…
[flagged]
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It doesn't change the premise. AI should be assisting us, instead it's doing the job and it's us being an assistant to it. This is a monumental shift that people seem to be missing in how knowledge working is changing and it's going beyond mere coding. Guardrails, prompts, whatever, it's us helping it doing the job, not the other way around. Opus 4.6 was the last genuinely good assistant LLM, but since then it's quit…
Wow... Our experiences have been very different, then. I've found each upgrade of Opus to be a noticeable improvement in its complex reasoning and delegation capabilities over its predecessor. To me, this feels in many ways like a technical manager or team lead's job, where I guide the process along using my knowledge and experience, and then let the agent fill in the rest (to the best of its ability). The agent can'…
I haven't stated that it's not more capable nor more "intelligent", it's the opposite.
I will try to expand on what I mean.
LLMs "character/persona/tendencies" are increasingly less about acting as an assistant and more about finding the solution itself.
I use AI in a specific way: he assists, investigates and answers my question. I do the coding. It is increasingly difficult to use it as such, because it quickly jumps into giving me solutions instead of answering my specific questions.
I'll give you few examples.
I asked it to investigate DNS handling details in phoenix emailer module work, he did very little investigation and jumped into why I should've used magic links instead. Instead of assisting me in my research, it was hard wired to solve the problem (the wrong one, with a very wrong solution).
Today at work, I had a problem with batching, I wanted to understand if batching was even needed at all for our use case, and he kept circling around how to fix the batching bug instead. That's not what I asked it to do, yet, it jumped to the "solution".
I am increasingly frustrated by these models "personality" and tendencies that are unhelpful to assist me doing the task at hand and more on it doing it and me merely assisting/supervising.
Sure, very detailed prompting on how he has to act helps, but wait few turns and he drifts again to his default solution vomiting state.
Which makes me think that these models are hard wired on this mode of operation by consistent training and reinforcement of jumping from prompt to code solution.
This really hit home for me: In some cases, workers are also being asked to automate the parts of their jobs they enjoy most, Hinds said on the podcast, pointing to customer-service employees who enjoy building relationships but are increasingly expected to supervise AI agents instead. "That's what gives you joy and meaning at work," she said. "That is very dangerous." What's a 20% productivity gain if I constantly f…
This is an important point. My light-bulb moment was when I talked to a product owner in a previous job, and I expressed surprise around an expensive planned change, because it didn't seem that valuable to our customers. He said, "Almost half of what we do is not that valuable to our customers, but it's valuable to him, and her, and him", pointing through the conference-room window at my fellow programmers, "and that…
This really hit home for me: In some cases, workers are also being asked to automate the parts of their jobs they enjoy most, Hinds said on the podcast, pointing to customer-service employees who enjoy building relationships but are increasingly expected to supervise AI agents instead. "That's what gives you joy and meaning at work," she said. "That is very dangerous." What's a 20% productivity gain if I constantly f…
[flagged]
Consumers will be spoiled for choice between deeply mediocre options.
Besides, what's the point of adopting new technologies if it's not to increase the quality of life? If everyone just exists in service of the product development lifecycle, who and what are the products actually for?
This really hit home for me: In some cases, workers are also being asked to automate the parts of their jobs they enjoy most, Hinds said on the podcast, pointing to customer-service employees who enjoy building relationships but are increasingly expected to supervise AI agents instead. "That's what gives you joy and meaning at work," she said. "That is very dangerous." What's a 20% productivity gain if I constantly f…
This is an important point. My light-bulb moment was when I talked to a product owner in a previous job, and I expressed surprise around an expensive planned change, because it didn't seem that valuable to our customers. He said, "Almost half of what we do is not that valuable to our customers, but it's valuable to him, and her, and him", pointing through the conference-room window at my fellow programmers, "and that…
This really hit home for me: In some cases, workers are also being asked to automate the parts of their jobs they enjoy most, Hinds said on the podcast, pointing to customer-service employees who enjoy building relationships but are increasingly expected to supervise AI agents instead. "That's what gives you joy and meaning at work," she said. "That is very dangerous." What's a 20% productivity gain if I constantly f…
[flagged]
6 hours a week is low, unless its the average spread across industries. I think I spend more time in Claude Code via the CLI versus any other app I have on my laptop. Like others said, the frustration is when it gets something so wrong you just think "wow, how'd you mess that up?" but when it gets it right its kind of nice. I also dont like that I basically tell Claude what to do, and then either go to busy work or w…
I kind of enjoy exploring black boxes, trying how different inputs are mapping to differences in outputs. It's kind of like hacking. The problem is, they keep altering the box.