5 ms·

From the article: > A 2024 GitHub survey found that nearly all enterprise developers (97%) are using Generative AI coding tools. These tools have rapidly evolv

From the article: > A 2024 GitHub survey found that nearly all enterprise developers (97%) are using Generative AI coding tools. These tools have rapidly evolved from experimental novelties to mission-critical development infrastructure, with teams across the globe relying on them daily to accelerate coding tasks. That seemed high, what the actual report says: > More than 97% of respondents reported having used AI coding tools at work at some point, a finding consistent across all four countries. However, a smaller percentage said their companies actively encourage AI tool adoption or allow the use of AI tools, varying by region. The U.S. leads with 88% of respondents indicating at least some company support for AI use, while Germany is lowest at 59%. This highlights an opportunity for organizations to better support their developers’ interest in AI tools, considering local regulations. Fun that the survey uses the stats to say that companies should support increasing usage, while the article uses it to try and show near-total usage already.

rvnx 1y ago
In some way, we reached 100% of developers, and now usage is expanding, as non-developers can now develop applications.
- _heimdall 1y ago
  Wouldn't that then make those people developers? The total pool of developers would grow, the percentage couldn't go above 100%.
  - rvnx 1y ago
    Probably. There is a similar question: if you ask ChatGPT / Midjourney to generate a drawing, are you an artist ? (to me yes, which would mean that AI "vibe coders" are actual developers in their own way)
    - dimitri-vs 1y ago
      If my 5 yo daughter draws a square with a triangle on top is she an architect?
      - guappa 1y ago
        Yes, most architects can't really do the structure calculations themselves.
      - _heimdall 1y ago
        That's quite a straw man example though. If your daughter could draw a house with enough detail that someone could take it and actually build it then you'd be more along the lines of the GP's LLM artist question.
        dimitri-vs 1y ago
        Not really, the point was contrasting sentimental labels with professionally defined titles, which seems precisely the distinction needed here. It's easy enough to look up on the agreed upon term for software engineer / developer and agree that it's more than someone that copy pastes code until it just barely runs. EDIT: To clarify I was only talking about vibe coder = developer. In this case the LLM is more of the developer and they are the product manager.
        _heimdall 1y ago
        Do we have professionally defined titles for developer or software engineer? I've never seen it clarified so I tend to default to the lowest common denominator - if you're making software in some way you're a developer. The tools someone uses doesn't really factor into it for me (even if that is copy/pasting from stackoverflow).
      - toofy 1y ago
        nope. if i ask an llm to give me a detailed schematic to build a bridge, im not magically * poof * a structural engineer.
    - danudey 1y ago
      If I tell a human artist to draw me something, am I an artist? No. Neither are people who ask AI to draw them something.
      - _heimdall 1y ago
        That probably depends on whether you consider LLMs, or human artists, as tools. If someone uses an LLM to make code, is consider the LLM to be a tool that will only be as good as the person prompting it. The person, then, is the developer while the LLM is a tool they're using. I don't consider auto complete, IDEs, or LSPs to take away from my being a developer. This distinction likely goes out the window entirely if you consider an LLM to actually be intelligent, sentient, or conscious though.
  - hnuser123456 1y ago
    I mean, I spent years learning to code in school and at home, but never managed to get a job doing it, so I just do what I can in my spare time, and LLMs help me feel like I haven't completely fallen off. I can still hack together cool stuff and keep learning.
    - _heimdall 1y ago
      I actually meant it as a good thing! Our industry plays very loose with terms like "developer" and "engineer". We never really defined them well and its always felt more like gate keeping. IMO if someone uses what tools they have, whether thats an LLM or vim, and is able to ship software they're a developer in my book.
delusional 1y ago
It might be fun if it didn't seem dishonest. The report tries to highlight a divide between employee curiosity and employer encouragement, undercut by their own analysis that most have tried them anyway. The article MISREPRESENTS that statistic to imply universal utility. That professional developers find it so useful that they universally chose to make daily use of it. It implies that Copilot is somehow more useful than an IDE without itself making that ridiculous claim.
- _heimdall 1y ago
  And employers are now starting to require compliance with using LLMs regardless of employee curiosity. Shopify now includes LLM use in annual reviews, and if I'm not mistaken GitHub followed suit.
- placardloop 1y ago
  The article is typical security issue embellishment/blogspam. They are incentivized to make it seem like AI is a mission-critical piece of software, because more AI reliance means a security issue in AI is a bigger deal, which means more pats on the back for them for finding it. Sadly, much of the security industry has been reduced to a competition over who can find the biggest vuln, and it has the effect of lowering the quality of discourse around all of it.
Vinnl 1y ago
Even that quote itself jumps from "are using" to "mission-critical development infrastructure ... relying on them daily".
_heimdall 1y ago
> This highlights an opportunity for organizations to better support their developers’ interest in AI tools, considering local regulations. This is a funny one to see included in GitHub's report. If I'm not mistaken, github is now using the same approach as Shoplify with regards to requiring LLM use and including it as part of a self report survey for annual review. I guess they took their 2024 survey to heart and are ready to 100x productivity.
krainboltgreene 1y ago
I wonder if AI here also stands in for decades long tools like language servers and intellisense.
placardloop 1y ago
I’d be pretty skeptical of any of these surveys about AI tool adoption. At my extremely large tech company, all developers were forced to install AI coding assistants into our IDEs and browsers (via managed software updates that can’t be uninstalled). Our company then put out press releases parading how great the AI adoption numbers were. The statistics are manufactured.
- bagacrap 1y ago
  An AI powered autocompletion engine is an AI tool. I think few developers would complain about saving a few keystrokes.
  - sethops1 1y ago
    I think few developers didn't already have powerful autocomplete engines at their disposal.
    - pdntspa 1y ago
      The AI autocomplete I use (Jetbrains) stands head-and-shoulders above its non-AI autocomplete, and Jetbrains' autocomplete is already considered best-in-class. Its python support is so good that I still haven't figured out how to get anything even remotely close to it running in VSCode
      - groby_b 1y ago
        How's it compare against e.g. cursor?
        pdntspa 1y ago
        No idea, I have been playing around with Roo Code though and the agentic AIs fill a completely different role
      - hyperman1 1y ago
        The Jetbrains AI autocomplete is indeed a lot better than the old one, but I can't predict it, so I have to keep watching it. E.g. a few days ago I wanted to verify if a rebuilt DB table matched the original. So we built a query with autocomplete SELECT ... FROM newtable n JOIN oldtable o ON ... WHERE n.field1<> o.field1 OR and now we start autocompleting field comparisons and it nicely keeps generating similar code. Until: n.field11<> o.field10 Wait? Why 10 instead of 11?
AlienRobot 1y ago
I've tried coding with AI for the first time recently[1] so I just joined that statistic. I assume most people here already know how it works and I'm just late to the party, but my experience was that Copilot was very bad at generating anything complex through chat requests but very good at generating single lines of code with autocompletion. It really highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of LLM's for me. For example, if you try adding getters and setters to a simple Rect class, it's so fast to do it with Copilot you might just add more getters/setters than you initially wanted. You type pub fn right() and it autocompletes left + width. That's convenient and not something traditional code completion can do. I wouldn't say it's "mission critical" however. It's just faster than copy pasting or Googling. The vulnerability highlighted in the article appears to only exist if you put code straight from Copilot into anything without checking it first. That sounds insane to me. It's just as untrusted input as some random guy on the Internet. [1] https://www.virtualcuriosities.com/articles/4935/coding-with-ai-for-the-first-time https://www.virtualcuriosities.com/articles/4935/coding-with...
- GuB-42 1y ago
  > it's so fast to do it with Copilot you might just add more getters/setters than you initially wanted Especially if you don't need getters and setters at all. It depends on you use case, but for your Rect class, you can just have x, y, width, height as public attributes. I know there are arguments against it, but the general idea is that if AI makes it easy to write boilerplate you don't need, then it made development slower in the long run, not faster, as it is additional code to maintain. > The vulnerability highlighted in the article appears to only exist if you put code straight from Copilot into anything without checking it first. That sounds insane to me. It's just as untrusted input as some random guy on the Internet. It doesn't sound insane to everyone, and even you may lower you standards for insanity if you are on a deadline and just want to be done with the thing. And even if you check the code, it is easy to overlook things, especially if these things are designed to be overlooked. For example, typos leading to malicious forks of packages.
  - prymitive 1y ago
    Once the world is all run on AI generated code how much memory and cpu cycles will be lost to unnecessary code? Is the next wave of HN top stories “How we ditched AI code and reduced our AWS bill by 10000%”?
captainkrtek 1y ago
I agree this sounds high, I wonder if "using Generative AI coding tools" in this survey is satisfied by having an IDE with Gen AI capabilities, not necessarily using those features within the IDE.

rvnx 1y ago

In some way, we reached 100% of developers, and now usage is expanding, as non-developers can now develop applications.

_heimdall 1y ago
Wouldn't that then make those people developers? The total pool of developers would grow, the percentage couldn't go above 100%.
- rvnx 1y ago
  Probably. There is a similar question: if you ask ChatGPT / Midjourney to generate a drawing, are you an artist ? (to me yes, which would mean that AI "vibe coders" are actual developers in their own way)
  - dimitri-vs 1y ago
    If my 5 yo daughter draws a square with a triangle on top is she an architect?
    - guappa 1y ago
      Yes, most architects can't really do the structure calculations themselves.
    - _heimdall 1y ago
      That's quite a straw man example though. If your daughter could draw a house with enough detail that someone could take it and actually build it then you'd be more along the lines of the GP's LLM artist question.
      - dimitri-vs 1y ago
        Not really, the point was contrasting sentimental labels with professionally defined titles, which seems precisely the distinction needed here. It's easy enough to look up on the agreed upon term for software engineer / developer and agree that it's more than someone that copy pastes code until it just barely runs. EDIT: To clarify I was only talking about vibe coder = developer. In this case the LLM is more of the developer and they are the product manager.
        _heimdall 1y ago
        Do we have professionally defined titles for developer or software engineer? I've never seen it clarified so I tend to default to the lowest common denominator - if you're making software in some way you're a developer. The tools someone uses doesn't really factor into it for me (even if that is copy/pasting from stackoverflow).
    - toofy 1y ago
      nope. if i ask an llm to give me a detailed schematic to build a bridge, im not magically * poof * a structural engineer.
  - danudey 1y ago
    If I tell a human artist to draw me something, am I an artist? No. Neither are people who ask AI to draw them something.
    - _heimdall 1y ago
      That probably depends on whether you consider LLMs, or human artists, as tools. If someone uses an LLM to make code, is consider the LLM to be a tool that will only be as good as the person prompting it. The person, then, is the developer while the LLM is a tool they're using. I don't consider auto complete, IDEs, or LSPs to take away from my being a developer. This distinction likely goes out the window entirely if you consider an LLM to actually be intelligent, sentient, or conscious though.
- hnuser123456 1y ago
  I mean, I spent years learning to code in school and at home, but never managed to get a job doing it, so I just do what I can in my spare time, and LLMs help me feel like I haven't completely fallen off. I can still hack together cool stuff and keep learning.
  - _heimdall 1y ago
    I actually meant it as a good thing! Our industry plays very loose with terms like "developer" and "engineer". We never really defined them well and its always felt more like gate keeping. IMO if someone uses what tools they have, whether thats an LLM or vim, and is able to ship software they're a developer in my book.

delusional 1y ago

It might be fun if it didn't seem dishonest. The report tries to highlight a divide between employee curiosity and employer encouragement, undercut by their own analysis that most have tried them anyway. The article MISREPRESENTS that statistic to imply universal utility. That professional developers find it so useful that they universally chose to make daily use of it. It implies that Copilot is somehow more useful than an IDE without itself making that ridiculous claim.

_heimdall 1y ago
And employers are now starting to require compliance with using LLMs regardless of employee curiosity. Shopify now includes LLM use in annual reviews, and if I'm not mistaken GitHub followed suit.
placardloop 1y ago
The article is typical security issue embellishment/blogspam. They are incentivized to make it seem like AI is a mission-critical piece of software, because more AI reliance means a security issue in AI is a bigger deal, which means more pats on the back for them for finding it. Sadly, much of the security industry has been reduced to a competition over who can find the biggest vuln, and it has the effect of lowering the quality of discourse around all of it.

Vinnl 1y ago

Even that quote itself jumps from "are using" to "mission-critical development infrastructure ... relying on them daily".

_heimdall 1y ago

> This highlights an opportunity for organizations to better support their developers’ interest in AI tools, considering local regulations. This is a funny one to see included in GitHub's report. If I'm not mistaken, github is now using the same approach as Shoplify with regards to requiring LLM use and including it as part of a self report survey for annual review. I guess they took their 2024 survey to heart and are ready to 100x productivity.

krainboltgreene 1y ago

I wonder if AI here also stands in for decades long tools like language servers and intellisense.

placardloop 1y ago

I’d be pretty skeptical of any of these surveys about AI tool adoption. At my extremely large tech company, all developers were forced to install AI coding assistants into our IDEs and browsers (via managed software updates that can’t be uninstalled). Our company then put out press releases parading how great the AI adoption numbers were. The statistics are manufactured.

bagacrap 1y ago
An AI powered autocompletion engine is an AI tool. I think few developers would complain about saving a few keystrokes.
- sethops1 1y ago
  I think few developers didn't already have powerful autocomplete engines at their disposal.
  - pdntspa 1y ago
    The AI autocomplete I use (Jetbrains) stands head-and-shoulders above its non-AI autocomplete, and Jetbrains' autocomplete is already considered best-in-class. Its python support is so good that I still haven't figured out how to get anything even remotely close to it running in VSCode
    - groby_b 1y ago
      How's it compare against e.g. cursor?
      - pdntspa 1y ago
        No idea, I have been playing around with Roo Code though and the agentic AIs fill a completely different role
    - hyperman1 1y ago
      The Jetbrains AI autocomplete is indeed a lot better than the old one, but I can't predict it, so I have to keep watching it. E.g. a few days ago I wanted to verify if a rebuilt DB table matched the original. So we built a query with autocomplete SELECT ... FROM newtable n JOIN oldtable o ON ... WHERE n.field1<> o.field1 OR and now we start autocompleting field comparisons and it nicely keeps generating similar code. Until: n.field11<> o.field10 Wait? Why 10 instead of 11?

AlienRobot 1y ago

I've tried coding with AI for the first time recently[1] so I just joined that statistic. I assume most people here already know how it works and I'm just late to the party, but my experience was that Copilot was very bad at generating anything complex through chat requests but very good at generating single lines of code with autocompletion. It really highlighted the strengths and shortcomings of LLM's for me. For example, if you try adding getters and setters to a simple Rect class, it's so fast to do it with Copilot you might just add more getters/setters than you initially wanted. You type pub fn right() and it autocompletes left + width. That's convenient and not something traditional code completion can do. I wouldn't say it's "mission critical" however. It's just faster than copy pasting or Googling. The vulnerability highlighted in the article appears to only exist if you put code straight from Copilot into anything without checking it first. That sounds insane to me. It's just as untrusted input as some random guy on the Internet. [1] https://www.virtualcuriosities.com/articles/4935/coding-with-ai-for-the-first-time https://www.virtualcuriosities.com/articles/4935/coding-with...

GuB-42 1y ago
> it's so fast to do it with Copilot you might just add more getters/setters than you initially wanted Especially if you don't need getters and setters at all. It depends on you use case, but for your Rect class, you can just have x, y, width, height as public attributes. I know there are arguments against it, but the general idea is that if AI makes it easy to write boilerplate you don't need, then it made development slower in the long run, not faster, as it is additional code to maintain. > The vulnerability highlighted in the article appears to only exist if you put code straight from Copilot into anything without checking it first. That sounds insane to me. It's just as untrusted input as some random guy on the Internet. It doesn't sound insane to everyone, and even you may lower you standards for insanity if you are on a deadline and just want to be done with the thing. And even if you check the code, it is easy to overlook things, especially if these things are designed to be overlooked. For example, typos leading to malicious forks of packages.
- prymitive 1y ago
  Once the world is all run on AI generated code how much memory and cpu cycles will be lost to unnecessary code? Is the next wave of HN top stories “How we ditched AI code and reduced our AWS bill by 10000%”?

captainkrtek 1y ago

I agree this sounds high, I wonder if "using Generative AI coding tools" in this survey is satisfied by having an IDE with Gen AI capabilities, not necessarily using those features within the IDE.