3 ms·

1. is a bit contradictory or at the least a "devils in the details" wishful fantasy which hasn't been showcased convincingly in the wild yet (by "the wild", I

1. is a bit contradictory or at the least a "devils in the details" wishful fantasy which hasn't been showcased convincingly in the wild yet (by "the wild", I mean software eng shops and corps). It's assumed the devs who have taste were able to implement their taste fine pre-AI, sure, but the whole gotcha in 1. is that the ones with good taste currently are not confident in implementing their good taste while simultaneously "producing good results quickly using AI".

tpxl 18d ago
I disagree. There is a lot of boilerplate to write and mundane things to check, which AI can speed up a lot. I'm not talking about 'software engineering' here, but about 'programming', which consists of a lot of write DTO->write rest interface->write interface->write simple select query->map response. The good taste here comes from the architectural design and the UI design. The amount of 'software engineers' who couldn't design a table to be readable or a flow to be intuitive is off the charts. AI neither helps nor harms here, it just makes implementing good and bad decisions faster.
- yhcj 17d ago
  also people have no clue how to know what is good or bad. It's like if I asked an LLM to produce a contract for a a new hire (my friend the one I mentioned, did that BTW LOL) Yeah, okay, it might be good, probably very good, in fact might be GREAT. But I just have no clue
- sillyfluke 17d ago
  Since the discussion was related to the job security of a programmer with good taste, I'm trying to read your comment from that perspective. If I am understanding you correctly, you are claiming that an AI will not design a table to be readable unless a programmer with good taste is prompting it. Did I understand you correctly? If so, then yes we are going to arrive at different conclusions, because my claim is that the table made by the programmer with no taste will be acceptable to the client, hence good taste won't save the other programmer because good taste will require more guiding and interference by the programmer. And then the client will just go with the no taste implementation. If the programmer with good taste truly does not lose any time implementing their solution when compared to the other programmer, as you claim, then yes the client will go with good taste since all else are equal. I just find those assumptions hard to believe at this stage.

tpxl 18d ago

I disagree. There is a lot of boilerplate to write and mundane things to check, which AI can speed up a lot. I'm not talking about 'software engineering' here, but about 'programming', which consists of a lot of write DTO->write rest interface->write interface->write simple select query->map response. The good taste here comes from the architectural design and the UI design. The amount of 'software engineers' who couldn't design a table to be readable or a flow to be intuitive is off the charts. AI neither helps nor harms here, it just makes implementing good and bad decisions faster.

yhcj 17d ago
also people have no clue how to know what is good or bad. It's like if I asked an LLM to produce a contract for a a new hire (my friend the one I mentioned, did that BTW LOL) Yeah, okay, it might be good, probably very good, in fact might be GREAT. But I just have no clue
sillyfluke 17d ago
Since the discussion was related to the job security of a programmer with good taste, I'm trying to read your comment from that perspective. If I am understanding you correctly, you are claiming that an AI will not design a table to be readable unless a programmer with good taste is prompting it. Did I understand you correctly? If so, then yes we are going to arrive at different conclusions, because my claim is that the table made by the programmer with no taste will be acceptable to the client, hence good taste won't save the other programmer because good taste will require more guiding and interference by the programmer. And then the client will just go with the no taste implementation. If the programmer with good taste truly does not lose any time implementing their solution when compared to the other programmer, as you claim, then yes the client will go with good taste since all else are equal. I just find those assumptions hard to believe at this stage.