←back to thread

179 points articsputnik | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.207s | source
Show context
serbuvlad ◴[] No.45054479[source]
I think the whole AI vs non. AI debate is a bit besides the point. Engineers are stuck in the old paradigm of "perfect" algorithms.

I think the image you post at the beginning basically sums it up for me: ChatGPT o3/5 Thinking can one-shot 75% of most reasonably sized tasks I give it without breaking a sweat, but struggles with tweaks to get it to 100%. So I make those tweaks myself and I have cut my code writing task in half or one third of the time.

ChatGPT also knows more idioms and useful libraries than I do so I generally end up with cleaner code this way.

Ferrari's are still hand assembled but Ford's assembly line and machines help save up human labor even if the quality of a mass-produced item is less than a hand-crafted one. But if everything was hand-crafted, we would have no computers at all to program.

Programming and writing will become niche and humans will still be used where a quality higher than what AI can produce is needed. But most code will be done by minotaur human-ai teams, where the human has a minimal but necessary contribution to keep the AI on track... I mean, it already is.

replies(16): >>45054579 #>>45054647 #>>45054815 #>>45054948 #>>45054968 #>>45055113 #>>45055151 #>>45055212 #>>45055260 #>>45055308 #>>45055473 #>>45055512 #>>45055563 #>>45058219 #>>45060059 #>>45061019 #
simianwords ◴[] No.45054815[source]
This comment captures it.

AI can do 80% of the work. I can review it later. And I spend much less time reviewing than I would have typing up everything manually.

I recently used it to add some logging and exception handling. It had to be done in multiple places.

A simple 2 line prompt one shotted it. Why do I need to waste time writing boring code?

replies(9): >>45054965 #>>45055005 #>>45055144 #>>45055163 #>>45055240 #>>45055406 #>>45057592 #>>45057736 #>>45057973 #
roblh ◴[] No.45055005[source]
Are you still going to have the skills to review it a year from now? Or 5 years from now when you’ve become accustomed to only writing <20% of the code? I’m already witnessing my coworkers skills degrading because of this, and it’s only going to get worse. Programming is a language, and when you don’t use it, it fades.
replies(2): >>45055073 #>>45055086 #
simianwords ◴[] No.45055073[source]
What will happen is that we as developers will move one layer up in the abstraction. In the future it would seem a bit nonsensical to focus on individual lines of code and syntax because AI can more or less deal with it.

We will be focusing more higher level design - which database, where the data flows, which service is used where and so on. So you will just need different skills. Coding as a skill won't be that important.

replies(5): >>45055154 #>>45055470 #>>45057599 #>>45057700 #>>45062291 #
1. nothrabannosir ◴[] No.45057700[source]
if this is true we will have to trust committing prompts not code.

I don’t worry about assembly because the abstraction layer is reliable. I don’t worry about ISAs, ucode, transistors, etc. the abstraction layer is reliable.

The same is not true for LLMs today. Circumstantial evidence: people commit the lower layer. That’s not an abstraction any more than an IDEs tab complete or “new project template” is an abstraction.

When someone stops reading the output entirely and has a codebase that is only prompts, I’ll hear them out on skill obsolescence.

(Edit: changed to hypothetical)