3 ms·

> Or do they have 25% trivial code? We all have probably 25% or more trivial code. AI is great for that. I have X (table structure, model, data, etc) and I w

> Or do they have 25% trivial code? We all have probably 25% or more trivial code. AI is great for that. I have X (table structure, model, data, etc) and I want to make Y with it. A lot of code is pretty much mindless shuffling data around. The other thing is good for is anything pretty standard. If I'm using a new technology and I just want to get started with whatever is the best practice, it's going to do that. If I ever have to do PowerShell (I hate PowerShell), I can get AI to generate pretty much whatever I want and then I'm smart enough to fix any issues. But I really don't like starting from nothing in a tech I hate.

randomNumber7 2y ago
Yes but then it would be more logical to say "AI makes our devs 25% more efficient". This is not what he said, but imo you are obviously right.
- wvenable 2y ago
  Not necessarily. If 25% of the code is written by AI but that code isn't very interesting or difficult, it might not be making the devs 25% more efficient. It could even possibly be more but, either way, these are different metrics.
- johannes1234321 2y ago
  The benefit doesn't translate 1:1. The generated code has to be read and verified and might require small adaptions. (Partially that can be done by AI as well) But for me it massively improved all the boilerplate generic work. A lot of those things which are just annoying work, but not interesting. Then I can focus on the bigger things, on the important parts.
lambdasquirrel 2y ago
I’ve already had one job interview where the applicant seemed broadly knowledgeable about everything we asked them during lead-in questions before actual debugging. Then when they had to actually dig deeper or demonstrate understanding while solving some problem, they fell short. I’m pretty sure they weren’t the first and there’ve been others we didn’t know about. So now I don’t ask lead-in questions anymore. Surprisingly, it doesn’t seem to make much of a difference and I don’t need to get burned again.

randomNumber7 2y ago

Yes but then it would be more logical to say "AI makes our devs 25% more efficient". This is not what he said, but imo you are obviously right.

wvenable 2y ago
Not necessarily. If 25% of the code is written by AI but that code isn't very interesting or difficult, it might not be making the devs 25% more efficient. It could even possibly be more but, either way, these are different metrics.
johannes1234321 2y ago
The benefit doesn't translate 1:1. The generated code has to be read and verified and might require small adaptions. (Partially that can be done by AI as well) But for me it massively improved all the boilerplate generic work. A lot of those things which are just annoying work, but not interesting. Then I can focus on the bigger things, on the important parts.

lambdasquirrel 2y ago

I’ve already had one job interview where the applicant seemed broadly knowledgeable about everything we asked them during lead-in questions before actual debugging. Then when they had to actually dig deeper or demonstrate understanding while solving some problem, they fell short. I’m pretty sure they weren’t the first and there’ve been others we didn’t know about. So now I don’t ask lead-in questions anymore. Surprisingly, it doesn’t seem to make much of a difference and I don’t need to get burned again.