4 ms·

I work at Google, this stuff is available, entirely optional, and in fact the most recent stuff is still something you have to sign up for and get on an opt-in

I work at Google, this stuff is available, entirely optional, and in fact the most recent stuff is still something you have to sign up for and get on an opt-in basis in return for providing feedback/answering surveys.

Tao3300 2y ago
> entirely optional Optional. I'll bet.
- danpalmer 2y ago
  What would it mean for code suggestions to be non-optional? Like, you can't edit the code file yourself but have to talk to a chatbot to ask it to make the edits for you? I think that's fairly obviously a ridiculous notion.
  - vitus 2y ago
    I could envision some point in the future where the tooling is good enough that if you reject the suggestion, you had better have a very good reason for doing so. We're already there on the formatting front, as well as the widely-enabled clang-tidy checks (e.g. pessimizing moves). Once a tool consistently meets that high bar, it's irrelevant whether its suggestions are derived from static analysis or a LLM. As far as being non-optional: a code owner could very much refuse to approve your change until it conforms to their standards for their code base. ML code suggestions at Google do not inspire that high level of confidence in me today, but I have no reason for thinking that will always be the case.
    - danpalmer 2y ago
      I see your point, and maybe you're right, but I do think formatting tools are materially different. You can define correctness for a formatting tool and they're understood to be about enforcing a consistent style. That doesn't apply to code more generally where there's more open to interpretation, other "style" to consider, program behaviour, etc. Also I would say that automatic formatters weren't popular until the mid 2010s from what I've experienced, despite being technically possible since pretty much the advent of programming. I even remember having to push hard for adoption of them in ~2018. Even if the AI tools were at the level (and they're definitely not yet, any of them), it could easily take a decade for it to become the norm or for it to be mandated.
  - Tao3300 2y ago
    I meant for straight opting out of even having it.
endisneigh 2y ago
This is not true. You can’t even disable AI entirely in critique (AI suggested edits), not to mention cider. Certain aspects can be disabled but you cannot entirely remove all AI affordances. It’s force feeding. It will eventually all be opt-out. This is obvious to anyone who works at google. Again, same as force feeding of gen AI search
- jstarks 2y ago
  Do you find this problematic?
  - endisneigh 2y ago
    It’s usually wrong. Use Gemini if you want a preview. I don’t mind optionality, but it can’t be disabled so it’s annoying.
- danpalmer 2y ago
  I have AI suggested edits turned off. It's the 4th setting down in the settings menu. AI suggestions in Cider can be disabled. And all of these things are web apps for which googlers have a rich history of creating Chrome extensions to change things they don't like or disagree with. I don't feel it's obvious at all that this will become forced. What would that even mean – you don't get to edit code anymore but can only interact via chat with an AI which edits the code for you? I think it's obvious that's not going to happen. Will there be a day when you can't turn off AI suggestions for something? Maybe, but suggestions aren't requirements, no one is forced to use them so at worst they're a minor UI annoyance. I'm interested to hear why you have such a negative take on it? I don't particularly enjoy most AI implementations in products (not Google specific), but they're almost entirely optional everywhere, and ignoring them really isn't much of a problem.
  - endisneigh 2y ago
    You can turn off giving ai suggestions, not receiving them. Not all AI affordances in cider can be disabled. There are plenty of people complaining about this on yaqs and buganizer. > no one is forced to use them so at worst they're a minor UI annoyance. This attitude is exactly the problem with Google and is why Google’s AI rollout has been terrible thus far. Luckily the stock is still going up, so whatever I guess.
rishabhjain1198 2y ago
+1 for this. Stuff is completely optional.
- longerd2 2y ago
  +1 like in google+? :D

Tao3300 2y ago

> entirely optional Optional. I'll bet.

danpalmer 2y ago
What would it mean for code suggestions to be non-optional? Like, you can't edit the code file yourself but have to talk to a chatbot to ask it to make the edits for you? I think that's fairly obviously a ridiculous notion.
- vitus 2y ago
  I could envision some point in the future where the tooling is good enough that if you reject the suggestion, you had better have a very good reason for doing so. We're already there on the formatting front, as well as the widely-enabled clang-tidy checks (e.g. pessimizing moves). Once a tool consistently meets that high bar, it's irrelevant whether its suggestions are derived from static analysis or a LLM. As far as being non-optional: a code owner could very much refuse to approve your change until it conforms to their standards for their code base. ML code suggestions at Google do not inspire that high level of confidence in me today, but I have no reason for thinking that will always be the case.
  - danpalmer 2y ago
    I see your point, and maybe you're right, but I do think formatting tools are materially different. You can define correctness for a formatting tool and they're understood to be about enforcing a consistent style. That doesn't apply to code more generally where there's more open to interpretation, other "style" to consider, program behaviour, etc. Also I would say that automatic formatters weren't popular until the mid 2010s from what I've experienced, despite being technically possible since pretty much the advent of programming. I even remember having to push hard for adoption of them in ~2018. Even if the AI tools were at the level (and they're definitely not yet, any of them), it could easily take a decade for it to become the norm or for it to be mandated.
- Tao3300 2y ago
  I meant for straight opting out of even having it.

endisneigh 2y ago

This is not true. You can’t even disable AI entirely in critique (AI suggested edits), not to mention cider. Certain aspects can be disabled but you cannot entirely remove all AI affordances. It’s force feeding. It will eventually all be opt-out. This is obvious to anyone who works at google. Again, same as force feeding of gen AI search

jstarks 2y ago
Do you find this problematic?
- endisneigh 2y ago
  It’s usually wrong. Use Gemini if you want a preview. I don’t mind optionality, but it can’t be disabled so it’s annoying.
danpalmer 2y ago
I have AI suggested edits turned off. It's the 4th setting down in the settings menu. AI suggestions in Cider can be disabled. And all of these things are web apps for which googlers have a rich history of creating Chrome extensions to change things they don't like or disagree with. I don't feel it's obvious at all that this will become forced. What would that even mean – you don't get to edit code anymore but can only interact via chat with an AI which edits the code for you? I think it's obvious that's not going to happen. Will there be a day when you can't turn off AI suggestions for something? Maybe, but suggestions aren't requirements, no one is forced to use them so at worst they're a minor UI annoyance. I'm interested to hear why you have such a negative take on it? I don't particularly enjoy most AI implementations in products (not Google specific), but they're almost entirely optional everywhere, and ignoring them really isn't much of a problem.
- endisneigh 2y ago
  You can turn off giving ai suggestions, not receiving them. Not all AI affordances in cider can be disabled. There are plenty of people complaining about this on yaqs and buganizer. > no one is forced to use them so at worst they're a minor UI annoyance. This attitude is exactly the problem with Google and is why Google’s AI rollout has been terrible thus far. Luckily the stock is still going up, so whatever I guess.

rishabhjain1198 2y ago

+1 for this. Stuff is completely optional.

longerd2 2y ago
+1 like in google+? :D