4 ms·

That's disingenuous or naive. Almost nobody decides to expressly highlight the section of code (or whole files generated by ai) they just get on with the job wh

by rob_c 1y ago

That's disingenuous or naive. Almost nobody decides to expressly highlight the section of code (or whole files generated by ai) they just get on with the job when there's real deadlines and it's not about coding for the sake of the art form...

symfrog 1y ago
I am talking about correctness, not style, coding isn't just about being able to show activity (code produced), but rather producing a system that is correctly performing the intended task
- rob_c 1y ago
  Yes, and frankly you should be spending time writing large integration tests correctly not microscopic tests that forgot how tools interact. It's not about lines of code or quality it's about solving a problem. If the problem creates another problem then it's bad code. If it solves the problem without causing that then great. Move onto the next problem.
jakelazaroff 1y ago
If the generated implementation is not good, you're trading short-term "getting on with the job" and "real deadlines" for mid-to-long-term slowdown and missed deadlines. In other words, it matters whether the AI is creating technical debt.
- rob_c 1y ago
  If you're creating technical debt, you're creating technical debt. That has nothing to do with AI/LLMs. If you can't understand what the tool spits out either; learn, throw it away, or get it to make something you can understand.
  - jakelazaroff 1y ago
    Do you want to clarify your original comment, then? I just read it again, and it really sounds like you're saying that asking to review AI-generated code is "disingenuous or naive".
zwnow 1y ago
Same as pretending that vibe coding isn't producing tons of slop. "Just improve your prompt bro" doesn't work for most real codebases. The recent TEA app leak is a good example of vibe coding gone wrong, I wish I had as much copium as vibe coders to be blind to these things, as most of them clearly are like "it happened to them but surely won't happen to ME."
- NitpickLawyer 1y ago
  > The recent TEA app leak is a good example of vibe coding gone wrong Weren't there 2 or 3 dating apps that were launched before the "vibecoding" craze that went extremely popular and got extremely hacked weeks/months in? I also distinctly remember a social network having firebase global tokens on the clientside, also a few years ago.
  - zwnow 1y ago
    So that's an excuse for AI getting it wrong? It should know better if its so much better.
    - NitpickLawyer 1y ago
      Not an excuse, no. I agree it should be better. And it will get better. Just pointing out that some mistakes were systematically happening before vibecoding became a thing. We went from "this thing is a stochastic parrot that gives you poems and famous people styled text, but not much else" to "here's a fullstack app, it may have some security issues but otherwise it mainly works" in 2.5 years. People expect perfection, and move the goalposts. Give it a second. Learn what it can do today, adapt, prepare for what it can do tomorrow.
      - jakelazaroff 1y ago
        No one is moving the goalposts. There are a ton of people and companies trying to replace large swathes of workers with AI. So it's very reasonable to point out ways in which the AI's output does not measure up to that of those workers.

by rob_c 1y ago

symfrog 1y ago

I am talking about correctness, not style, coding isn't just about being able to show activity (code produced), but rather producing a system that is correctly performing the intended task

rob_c 1y ago
Yes, and frankly you should be spending time writing large integration tests correctly not microscopic tests that forgot how tools interact. It's not about lines of code or quality it's about solving a problem. If the problem creates another problem then it's bad code. If it solves the problem without causing that then great. Move onto the next problem.

jakelazaroff 1y ago

If the generated implementation is not good, you're trading short-term "getting on with the job" and "real deadlines" for mid-to-long-term slowdown and missed deadlines. In other words, it matters whether the AI is creating technical debt.

rob_c 1y ago
If you're creating technical debt, you're creating technical debt. That has nothing to do with AI/LLMs. If you can't understand what the tool spits out either; learn, throw it away, or get it to make something you can understand.
- jakelazaroff 1y ago
  Do you want to clarify your original comment, then? I just read it again, and it really sounds like you're saying that asking to review AI-generated code is "disingenuous or naive".

zwnow 1y ago

Same as pretending that vibe coding isn't producing tons of slop. "Just improve your prompt bro" doesn't work for most real codebases. The recent TEA app leak is a good example of vibe coding gone wrong, I wish I had as much copium as vibe coders to be blind to these things, as most of them clearly are like "it happened to them but surely won't happen to ME."

NitpickLawyer 1y ago
> The recent TEA app leak is a good example of vibe coding gone wrong Weren't there 2 or 3 dating apps that were launched before the "vibecoding" craze that went extremely popular and got extremely hacked weeks/months in? I also distinctly remember a social network having firebase global tokens on the clientside, also a few years ago.
- zwnow 1y ago
  So that's an excuse for AI getting it wrong? It should know better if its so much better.
  - NitpickLawyer 1y ago
    Not an excuse, no. I agree it should be better. And it will get better. Just pointing out that some mistakes were systematically happening before vibecoding became a thing. We went from "this thing is a stochastic parrot that gives you poems and famous people styled text, but not much else" to "here's a fullstack app, it may have some security issues but otherwise it mainly works" in 2.5 years. People expect perfection, and move the goalposts. Give it a second. Learn what it can do today, adapt, prepare for what it can do tomorrow.
    - jakelazaroff 1y ago
      No one is moving the goalposts. There are a ton of people and companies trying to replace large swathes of workers with AI. So it's very reasonable to point out ways in which the AI's output does not measure up to that of those workers.