←back to thread

Generative AI coding tools and agents do not work for me

(blog.miguelgrinberg.com)
399 points nomdep | 5 comments | 17 Jun 25 00:33 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
socalgal2 ◴[17 Jun 25 05:48 UTC] No.44296080[source]▶
> Another common argument I've heard is that Generative AI is helpful when you need to write code in a language or technology you are not familiar with. To me this also makes little sense.

I'm not sure I get this one. When I'm learning new tech I almost always have questions. I used to google them. If I couldn't find an answer I might try posting on stack overflow. Sometimes as I'm typing the question their search would finally kick in and find the answer (similar questions). Other times I'd post the question, if it didn't get closed, maybe I'd get an answer a few hours or days later.

Now I just ask ChatGPT or Gemini and more often than not it gives me the answer. That alone and nothing else (agent modes, AI editing or generating files) is enough to increase my output. I get answers 10x faster than I used to. I'm not sure what that has to do with the point about learning. Getting answers to those question is learning, regardless of where the answer comes from.

replies(13): >>44296120 #>>44296159 #>>44296324 #>>44296351 #>>44296416 #>>44296810 #>>44296818 #>>44297019 #>>44297098 #>>44298720 #>>44299945 #>>44300631 #>>44301438 #
nikanj ◴[17 Jun 25 06:54 UTC] No.44296351[source]▶
And ChatGPT never closes your question without answer because it (falsely) thinks it's a duplicate of a different question from 13 years ago
replies(1): >>44296637 #
nottorp ◴[17 Jun 25 07:46 UTC] No.44296637[source]▶
But it does give you a ready to copy paste answer instead of a 'teach the man how to fish' answer.
replies(2): >>44296748 #>>44296807 #
addandsubtract ◴[17 Jun 25 08:05 UTC] No.44296748[source]▶
Not if you prompt it to explain the answer it gives you.
replies(1): >>44296821 #
nottorp ◴[17 Jun 25 08:19 UTC] No.44296821[source]▶
Not the same thing. Copying code, even with comprehensive explanations, teaches less than writing/adjusting your own code based on advice.
replies(1): >>44298307 #
1. elbear ◴[17 Jun 25 12:27 UTC] No.44298307[source]▶
It can also do that if you ask it. It can give you exercises that you can solve. But you have to specifically ask, because by default it just gives you code.
replies(1): >>44298391 #
2. nottorp ◴[17 Jun 25 12:35 UTC] No.44298391[source]▶
Of course, I originally was picking on Stack Overflow's moderation.

Which strongly discouraged trying to teach people.

replies(1): >>44307232 #
3. elbear ◴[18 Jun 25 06:42 UTC] No.44307232[source]▶
Oh, I missed that. I also missed that about StackOverflow, although I wasn't active there. It sounds like the motto of SO was "Solve problems!" instead of "Teach people how to solve problems!".
replies(2): >>44307321 #>>44307465 #
4. nikanj ◴[18 Jun 25 06:59 UTC] No.44307321{3}[source]▶
Alas, someone bungled the incentive system and a closed question counts as a solved problem
5. nottorp ◴[18 Jun 25 07:29 UTC] No.44307465{3}[source]▶
It kinda went downhill at some point. But currently:

> And ChatGPT never closes your question without answer because it (falsely) thinks it's a duplicate of a different question from 13 years ago

ChatGPT acts exactly opposite to the SO mods.

> But it does give you a ready to copy paste answer instead of a 'teach the man how to fish' answer.

Here it acts exactly like what SO mods like.

The other comments are mostly people thinking this is about ChatGPT...