4 ms·

As someone responsible for the fall out from these tools being used to cut corners, I doubt it. And I'm talking about senior developers here with 10y+ experienc

As someone responsible for the fall out from these tools being used to cut corners, I doubt it. And I'm talking about senior developers here with 10y+ experience. People don't bother to understand problems now. Only the happy path is considered. It takes real intelligence to understand the side effects even a simple thing can have. What was a whiteboard session and a thinking process is now blindly trusted to some 3rd party agent. Consider reliably receiving a message from a queue and processing it at least once. So far I have encountered at least 0 times processing on two separate occasions. That is a big problem. Turns out the code was generated and no one even knows or cares enough including the people reviewing it because their magic friend wrote it and their other magic friend reviewed it and the management is happy that they were sold magic because some other magic thing wrote some marketing spiel that absolved them from any decision making responsibility. In some contexts a mistake like that has an actual tangible capital cost if it's a trade or a transaction in a regulated industry. It's not "just a mistake you can learn from" at that point. People tend to lazy, to steal a mathematical expression, and these tools bring the worst out in people.

brailsafe 2y ago
That's partly why I've only been using these tools for inconsequential tasks who's primary time cost is typing. Like throwing together a primitive prototype or mock generator and using my brain to build on it or get the rough structure down. HTML/CSS templating for example is still easy to screw up if you actually care about quality, but if you don't then you may as well find the fastest path there. I agree that the more convenience people rely on though, they seem less willing to sit with a hard problem and learn it the hard way, which is required in so many areas of programming or w/e, or sit with it and just grind their brain for possible edge cases or robust ways to implement something.
loandbehold 2y ago
How is it different from common situation today when a piece of code was written a long time ago by someone who no longer works at the company, so nobody understands how it works?
- Ekaros 2y ago
  The old code is probably close enough to correct. It has been battle tested for a while if it has not been actively worked on. If it has operated for good while without immediately noticeable issues it is likely okay for current uses.
threeseed 2y ago
> In some contexts a mistake like that has an actual tangible capital cost Developers need to be just as mindful of the reputational cost. Being known as someone who doesn't know what they are doing and is harming the team can cost you.
Kiro 2y ago
I've found that AI takes much more edge cases into account than my lazy brain does. It has no problem writing tedious code covering things that are very unlikely to happen. When I see the solution it suggests it's often more robust than my initial plan.

brailsafe 2y ago

That's partly why I've only been using these tools for inconsequential tasks who's primary time cost is typing. Like throwing together a primitive prototype or mock generator and using my brain to build on it or get the rough structure down. HTML/CSS templating for example is still easy to screw up if you actually care about quality, but if you don't then you may as well find the fastest path there. I agree that the more convenience people rely on though, they seem less willing to sit with a hard problem and learn it the hard way, which is required in so many areas of programming or w/e, or sit with it and just grind their brain for possible edge cases or robust ways to implement something.

loandbehold 2y ago

How is it different from common situation today when a piece of code was written a long time ago by someone who no longer works at the company, so nobody understands how it works?

Ekaros 2y ago
The old code is probably close enough to correct. It has been battle tested for a while if it has not been actively worked on. If it has operated for good while without immediately noticeable issues it is likely okay for current uses.

threeseed 2y ago

> In some contexts a mistake like that has an actual tangible capital cost Developers need to be just as mindful of the reputational cost. Being known as someone who doesn't know what they are doing and is harming the team can cost you.

Kiro 2y ago

I've found that AI takes much more edge cases into account than my lazy brain does. It has no problem writing tedious code covering things that are very unlikely to happen. When I see the solution it suggests it's often more robust than my initial plan.