←back to thread

Some things to expect in 2025

(lwn.net)
258 points signa11 | 2 comments | 16 Jan 25 22:55 UTC | HN request time: 1.511s | source
Show context
kirubakaran ◴[17 Jan 25 00:45 UTC] No.42732804[source]▶
> A major project will discover that it has merged a lot of AI-generated code

My friend works at a well-known tech company in San Francisco. He was reviewing his junior team member's pull request. When asked what a chunk of code did, the team member matter-of-factly replied "I don't know, chatgpt wrote that"

replies(16): >>42733064 #>>42733126 #>>42733357 #>>42733510 #>>42733737 #>>42733790 #>>42734461 #>>42734543 #>>42735030 #>>42735130 #>>42735456 #>>42735525 #>>42735773 #>>42736703 #>>42736792 #>>42737483 #
DowsingSpoon ◴[17 Jan 25 03:19 UTC] No.42733737[source]▶
I am fairly certain that if someone did that where I work then security would be escorting them off the property within the hour. This is NOT Okay.
replies(5): >>42733887 #>>42733897 #>>42734054 #>>42734331 #>>42734746 #
bitmasher9 ◴[17 Jan 25 03:54 UTC] No.42733897[source]▶
Where I work we are actively encouraged to use more AI tools while coding, to the point where my direct supervisor asked why my team’s usage statistics were lower than company average.
replies(1): >>42733926 #
dehrmann ◴[17 Jan 25 04:00 UTC] No.42733926[source]▶
It's not necessarily the use of AI tools (though the license parts are an issue), is that someone submitted code for review without knowing how it works.
replies(3): >>42733954 #>>42734138 #>>42735136 #
masteruvpuppetz ◴[17 Jan 25 04:04 UTC] No.42733954[source]▶
I think we should / have already reached to a place where AI written code is acceptable.
replies(3): >>42734014 #>>42734055 #>>42734506 #
1. bigstrat2003 ◴[17 Jan 25 04:16 UTC] No.42734014[source]▶
Whether it's acceptable or not to submit AI code, it is clearly unacceptable to submit code that you don't even understand. If that's all an employee is capable of, why on earth would the employer pay them software engineer salary versus hiring someone to do the exact same for minimum wage?
replies(1): >>42734337 #
2. userbinator ◴[17 Jan 25 05:17 UTC] No.42734337[source]▶
Or even replace them with the AI directly.