3 ms·

Yes, it is a waste of time right now not to use AI to write code. It's the same category of "artisan code" like "artisan cheese": you can do it if you have a t

Yes, it is a waste of time right now not to use AI to write code. It's the same category of "artisan code" like "artisan cheese": you can do it if you have a ton of free time as a hobby but other than a hobby? Not worth it.

unclebucknasty 11d ago
I still have to remind Ai not to use the n+1 pattern in queries, and fight it to stop using inconsistent inline styles vs classes, even within a single page. How are people getting this "waste of time not to use AI" and "generates 99% of my code" level of code quality? I know people's response will likely be something, something, "add instructions to memory to not use n+1", etc. But if the Ai wants to generate code this bad, then it represents an overall quality risk that would require an infinite memory file.
- rcxdude 11d ago
  Probably the largest part is that this kind of code quality is not that important to a lot of devs and applications. Personally I would not describe the majority of code I work on as particularly hard, the challenge was always in getting what I needed done efficiently as opposed to getting it done at all, and LLMs are extremely helpful for that. Though I think I'm more at 90% LLM-generated code, I still do spend a fair bit of time tidying up layout (and any user-visible prose).
- WASDx 11d ago
  It works if you neglect code quality and understanding. I've done a few vibe coded projects on my free time but I would feel shame for submitting that kind of code at work where I use LLMs more responsibly.
- kaoD 11d ago
  > How are people getting this "waste of time not to use AI" and "generates 99% of my code" level of code quality? They don't know what n+1 problem is and they don't know about long-term maintainability.
  - jappgar 11d ago
    tbf many human devs I've worked with don't think about n+1 and similar issues and need constant reminders. overall software quality seems largely unchanged
    - unclebucknasty 11d ago
      >tbf many human devs I've worked with don't... OTOH, if someone insists on writing bad code—even after being advised otherwise—then they should expect to be out of a job. Doesn't seem like "terminated junior developer" is the level of quality we should be accepting or promoting for AI.
      - jappgar 10d ago
        that doesn't actually happen though. If you fired every dev with sloppy code you wouldn't be left with much.
        unclebucknasty 9d ago
        You previously asserted that devs repeatedly ignored specific code quality instructions, which is clearly a fireable offense. You're now generalizing out to a vague concept of "sloppy code", which is not even quantifiable. In any case, the point is that low quality code shouldn't be promoted as the acceptable goal for AI.
- AlotOfReading 11d ago
  I've been developing a suspicion that many people simply aren't looking at what their agents produce and can't speak to the quality of it in a fully informed way. For context, I've set up harnesses with recursive automated review loops, spec driven development, explicit lists, better models, better harnesses, formal methods tooling, etc. All of it helps, but they don't eliminate output issues. Those become very apparent when I go through the slow, manual work of deeply comprehending / validating LLM code. And that leads me to one of three conclusions. Either my standards are achievable only by hyperintelligent programming gods, I have a skill issue using LLMs, or others aren't applying the same level of attention. The first is obviously untrue. I meet my own standards and I'm an idiot. The second seems unlikely because I can see my competent coworkers and well-regarded people in the community discussing the same issues. So that leaves the third.
  - deleted 11d ago
    [deleted]
  - voakbasda 11d ago
    If you assume that programmers’ skills follows a bell curve, the typical output will not be better than the average. And that leads directly into your third conclusion: average programmers just do not put in the effort. That’s literally part of what makes them average.
    - podocarp 10d ago
      Unfortunately most people just treat it as a job. And indeed, it is a job for most people. Not all farmers love gardening and all in their free time. It's just a livelihood. For me I like programming but honestly for my job I can't be assed to do it by hand anymore. It looks good enough, screw it, it's not like they pay me extra to produce handwritten code. When the whole org is pushing down this one path you know it's time to dgaf
- ryan_n 11d ago
  The truth is people just don't seem care about code quality anymore (if they ever did?). I don't think it generates great code (yes even using the state of the art, frontier, super max pro 9000 turbo boost ++ models), but it usually generates code that works. Sadly, that's all that most of the people in charge care about. I mean shit, half the time it doesn't even have to work great, look at the state of a lot of modern software. People complain about it all the time. Quite sad, but that seems to just be the state of things these days.
  - iwontberude 11d ago
    It’s quite an uncanny alignment with Nvidia and other semiconductor companies that benefit from their customers to bloating software and buying as many of their chips with no real thought given to efficiency of the runtime.
  - podocarp 10d ago
    I don't think corporate ever gave a shit about code quality. Honestly if there weren't building codes skyscrapers would be made with the cheapest shit that didn't collapse immediately and your house would be made of cardboard. Similarly if users were OK with buggy crap or if they had no choice (e.g. windows) then you can get away with lots of crap. You could only argue about it when an engineer was in charge and even so when they're high up enough the pressures and incentives are to just ship fast and break stuff. Not every company can afford to be a NASA making uncrashable code that runs for 100 years and goes to pluto and all.
- collinmanderson 8d ago
  I have the agent (Opus 5) spawn code reviews for their own work, and the code reviews generally catch n+1 queries.
oxi113 11d ago
I agree that it's a waste of time, but I started to realize that doing it a) puts be ahead of those people who don't, yes b) but also diminishes my technical skills if I don't actively try to engage about what I'm "vibecoding" and proactively trying to understand it.
- _zoltan_ 11d ago
  for your point a: writing code by hand puts you ahead of the people who don't write code by hand, eg, the people using LLMs to generate code? that doesn't make much sense assuming both of those personas are senior SWEs.
  - oxi113 10d ago
    Yes, it's more like the people who agressively vibe-code and had lost interest in learning by doing, and instead are doing by vibecoding. I feel like they are starting to lose their technical ability. The big AI tech companies are still interviewing people on manual coding tasks and deep understand, which when you're vibe coding a lot, you tend to diverge from those skills, because it's just easier to use AI to "help" you a lot.
    - DonHopkins 10d ago
      You've hit on the problem precisely. People are vibecoding to do without learning, and that's their problem, but doesn't have to be ours. They'd still be mindlessly copying and pasting from Stack Overflow without learning if they didn't have AI. If you have an aversion to reading code and learning from it, human or AI generated, you shouldn't be in this industry. If you're not using AI to teach yourself new things, you're not holding it right.
suddenlybananas 11d ago
Not the best metaphor, artisan cheese is something highly sought after. Go to France, there's a lot better cheese than Kraft singles.
- econ 11d ago
  We need enough slop to create that market. If you already had a hand crafted codebase, a ton of miles on it, no real issue for a long time and customers who value some metric of quality then it might be worth crafting things by hand — if only for the bragging.
- _zoltan_ 11d ago
  I don't need to go that far, living in Switzerland. I don't know why you'd assume I'm in the US, or somehow that I regard Kraft as great cheese.
  - suddenlybananas 11d ago
    It's called a joke, but surely you recognise that there's an enormous market for artisanal cheese?
    - DonHopkins 10d ago
      Even Swiss Cheese with artisanal holes.
SpikeyCoder 11d ago
It’s not a waste of time when usage limits are hit and changes need to be shipped
- _zoltan_ 11d ago
  buy another sub.
BlobberSnobber 11d ago
It is imperative that the feature be shipped, damned be the quality of that which underlies its existence. And once that feature has indeed been shipped, the machine shall toil, and from its work there shall be thousands of lines born, and for the next feature: thousands more!

unclebucknasty 11d ago

I still have to remind Ai not to use the n+1 pattern in queries, and fight it to stop using inconsistent inline styles vs classes, even within a single page. How are people getting this "waste of time not to use AI" and "generates 99% of my code" level of code quality? I know people's response will likely be something, something, "add instructions to memory to not use n+1", etc. But if the Ai wants to generate code this bad, then it represents an overall quality risk that would require an infinite memory file.

rcxdude 11d ago
Probably the largest part is that this kind of code quality is not that important to a lot of devs and applications. Personally I would not describe the majority of code I work on as particularly hard, the challenge was always in getting what I needed done efficiently as opposed to getting it done at all, and LLMs are extremely helpful for that. Though I think I'm more at 90% LLM-generated code, I still do spend a fair bit of time tidying up layout (and any user-visible prose).
WASDx 11d ago
It works if you neglect code quality and understanding. I've done a few vibe coded projects on my free time but I would feel shame for submitting that kind of code at work where I use LLMs more responsibly.
kaoD 11d ago
> How are people getting this "waste of time not to use AI" and "generates 99% of my code" level of code quality? They don't know what n+1 problem is and they don't know about long-term maintainability.
- jappgar 11d ago
  tbf many human devs I've worked with don't think about n+1 and similar issues and need constant reminders. overall software quality seems largely unchanged
  - unclebucknasty 11d ago
    >tbf many human devs I've worked with don't... OTOH, if someone insists on writing bad code—even after being advised otherwise—then they should expect to be out of a job. Doesn't seem like "terminated junior developer" is the level of quality we should be accepting or promoting for AI.
    - jappgar 10d ago
      that doesn't actually happen though. If you fired every dev with sloppy code you wouldn't be left with much.
      - unclebucknasty 9d ago
        You previously asserted that devs repeatedly ignored specific code quality instructions, which is clearly a fireable offense. You're now generalizing out to a vague concept of "sloppy code", which is not even quantifiable. In any case, the point is that low quality code shouldn't be promoted as the acceptable goal for AI.
AlotOfReading 11d ago
I've been developing a suspicion that many people simply aren't looking at what their agents produce and can't speak to the quality of it in a fully informed way. For context, I've set up harnesses with recursive automated review loops, spec driven development, explicit lists, better models, better harnesses, formal methods tooling, etc. All of it helps, but they don't eliminate output issues. Those become very apparent when I go through the slow, manual work of deeply comprehending / validating LLM code. And that leads me to one of three conclusions. Either my standards are achievable only by hyperintelligent programming gods, I have a skill issue using LLMs, or others aren't applying the same level of attention. The first is obviously untrue. I meet my own standards and I'm an idiot. The second seems unlikely because I can see my competent coworkers and well-regarded people in the community discussing the same issues. So that leaves the third.
- deleted 11d ago
  [deleted]
- voakbasda 11d ago
  If you assume that programmers’ skills follows a bell curve, the typical output will not be better than the average. And that leads directly into your third conclusion: average programmers just do not put in the effort. That’s literally part of what makes them average.
  - podocarp 10d ago
    Unfortunately most people just treat it as a job. And indeed, it is a job for most people. Not all farmers love gardening and all in their free time. It's just a livelihood. For me I like programming but honestly for my job I can't be assed to do it by hand anymore. It looks good enough, screw it, it's not like they pay me extra to produce handwritten code. When the whole org is pushing down this one path you know it's time to dgaf
ryan_n 11d ago
The truth is people just don't seem care about code quality anymore (if they ever did?). I don't think it generates great code (yes even using the state of the art, frontier, super max pro 9000 turbo boost ++ models), but it usually generates code that works. Sadly, that's all that most of the people in charge care about. I mean shit, half the time it doesn't even have to work great, look at the state of a lot of modern software. People complain about it all the time. Quite sad, but that seems to just be the state of things these days.
- iwontberude 11d ago
  It’s quite an uncanny alignment with Nvidia and other semiconductor companies that benefit from their customers to bloating software and buying as many of their chips with no real thought given to efficiency of the runtime.
- podocarp 10d ago
  I don't think corporate ever gave a shit about code quality. Honestly if there weren't building codes skyscrapers would be made with the cheapest shit that didn't collapse immediately and your house would be made of cardboard. Similarly if users were OK with buggy crap or if they had no choice (e.g. windows) then you can get away with lots of crap. You could only argue about it when an engineer was in charge and even so when they're high up enough the pressures and incentives are to just ship fast and break stuff. Not every company can afford to be a NASA making uncrashable code that runs for 100 years and goes to pluto and all.
collinmanderson 8d ago
I have the agent (Opus 5) spawn code reviews for their own work, and the code reviews generally catch n+1 queries.

oxi113 11d ago

I agree that it's a waste of time, but I started to realize that doing it a) puts be ahead of those people who don't, yes b) but also diminishes my technical skills if I don't actively try to engage about what I'm "vibecoding" and proactively trying to understand it.

_zoltan_ 11d ago
for your point a: writing code by hand puts you ahead of the people who don't write code by hand, eg, the people using LLMs to generate code? that doesn't make much sense assuming both of those personas are senior SWEs.
- oxi113 10d ago
  Yes, it's more like the people who agressively vibe-code and had lost interest in learning by doing, and instead are doing by vibecoding. I feel like they are starting to lose their technical ability. The big AI tech companies are still interviewing people on manual coding tasks and deep understand, which when you're vibe coding a lot, you tend to diverge from those skills, because it's just easier to use AI to "help" you a lot.
  - DonHopkins 10d ago
    You've hit on the problem precisely. People are vibecoding to do without learning, and that's their problem, but doesn't have to be ours. They'd still be mindlessly copying and pasting from Stack Overflow without learning if they didn't have AI. If you have an aversion to reading code and learning from it, human or AI generated, you shouldn't be in this industry. If you're not using AI to teach yourself new things, you're not holding it right.

suddenlybananas 11d ago

Not the best metaphor, artisan cheese is something highly sought after. Go to France, there's a lot better cheese than Kraft singles.

econ 11d ago
We need enough slop to create that market. If you already had a hand crafted codebase, a ton of miles on it, no real issue for a long time and customers who value some metric of quality then it might be worth crafting things by hand — if only for the bragging.
_zoltan_ 11d ago
I don't need to go that far, living in Switzerland. I don't know why you'd assume I'm in the US, or somehow that I regard Kraft as great cheese.
- suddenlybananas 11d ago
  It's called a joke, but surely you recognise that there's an enormous market for artisanal cheese?
  - DonHopkins 10d ago
    Even Swiss Cheese with artisanal holes.

SpikeyCoder 11d ago

It’s not a waste of time when usage limits are hit and changes need to be shipped

_zoltan_ 11d ago
buy another sub.

BlobberSnobber 11d ago

It is imperative that the feature be shipped, damned be the quality of that which underlies its existence. And once that feature has indeed been shipped, the machine shall toil, and from its work there shall be thousands of lines born, and for the next feature: thousands more!