901–910 of 1001 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
As the models keep improving, wouldn’t you be able to task a newer AI to “clean up this mess”?
Are they improving? I thought they were just getting more expensive
I feel in a really weird position where I both really dislike what AI is doing to the experience and practice of writing code, to the point where I want a job doing literally anything else besides using the computer, but also think that these tools are extremely powerful and only getting better. I think Mitchell's point is well taken -- it's possible for these tools to introduce rotten foundations that will only be f…
I've never had more fun coding, but the key is actually still writing the code yourself. The LLM has terrible judgment but an encyclopedic knowledge and the ability to pick out important details in a sea of information. Their worse use is producing code, but somehow that gets all the energy. Being an LLM babysitter is energy draining and you feel less and less in control. No job is worth being miserable doing somethi…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> $300/day token quota Are companies using per-token billing? Why - is there some reason they can’t buy the $200/mo Claude plan for every employee?
Max 20x is for individuals only. (could probably have emps get it themselves, and reimburse)
I’m at a FAANG and we have $300/day token quota. Personally I don’t use that much of it but management is pushing really hard for it. “the quota has been raised for a reason, use it”. Any task: “have you tried working on it with Claude?”. Every meeting “now engineer x and y will show you what he did with AI”. It’s not all useless but most of the days I think I would be more productive if some processes were streamlin…
Also at a FAANG here. Surprised you don't manage to use $300 in a whole day. It's almost trivial to productively use that much in under an hour. Leadership is not being dumb, at least on this topic. If your token usage is that low, you just aren't using AI that much (even if you think you are.)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, AI really lowered the bar for bad code in the name of delivering faster. I have seen people write highly complex code where all the complexity was not necessary. Think: deep unnecessary branching, pointless error handling and retries which make no sense in our context, hand-coded parsing using regexps, haphazard data flow, functions which seem purely computational but slyly make API calls, pointless…
When I read the discussions about AI making code worse I keep bringing the same argument: people made bad code even before AI. Average coder is barely functioning and that's a fact.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, AI really lowered the bar for bad code in the name of delivering faster. I have seen people write highly complex code where all the complexity was not necessary. Think: deep unnecessary branching, pointless error handling and retries which make no sense in our context, hand-coded parsing using regexps, haphazard data flow, functions which seem purely computational but slyly make API calls, pointless…
> In my experience, AI really lowered the bar for bad code in the name of delivering faster. I would've believed that 6 months ago, but not now. If you have a good codebase with proper rails, hygiene and architecture, AI will produce better code than most engineers out there. People forget that 90% of the field has always been charlatans barely able to implement a fizz buzz or go much beyond trial and error googling.…
This means you take less time reviewing code than it took for the machine to churn it out. All that code must be a ticking time bomb.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
In my experience, AI really lowered the bar for bad code in the name of delivering faster. I have seen people write highly complex code where all the complexity was not necessary. Think: deep unnecessary branching, pointless error handling and retries which make no sense in our context, hand-coded parsing using regexps, haphazard data flow, functions which seem purely computational but slyly make API calls, pointless…
When I read the discussions about AI making code worse I keep bringing the same argument: people made bad code even before AI. Average coder is barely functioning and that's a fact.
As others have elaborated, the problem is empowering them to ship mountains of bad code;
And yeah, many semi-technical M2s or even M1s can't distinguish bad code from good code, or worse bad architecture from good; this is golden time for those who are willing to sacrifice the future for present. Just burnnn'em tokenzzz.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
One AI can't vibe code out of the mess, so you'd make another AI trained on getting out of vibe coded messes? That's serious levels of circular thinking right there.
This is literally how training humans have worked for thousands of years. We train humans to do things untrained humans can not do.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I've never had more fun coding, but the key is actually still writing the code yourself. The LLM has terrible judgment but an encyclopedic knowledge and the ability to pick out important details in a sea of information. Their worse use is producing code, but somehow that gets all the energy. Being an LLM babysitter is energy draining and you feel less and less in control. No job is worth being miserable doing somethi…
My biggest complaint about AI is getting it to lock onto current or specific information has been darn near impossible. Its definitely there in its training data but for the life of me I cannot get it to stop bleeding long outdated or external information into its responses.