←back to thread

179 points articsputnik | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.203s | 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 #
1. 0xfaded ◴[] No.45057736[source]
This reminds me of the phenomenon of competence being inversely correlated with confidence until some inflection point is reached on the journey to mastery.

I think the argument being put forward here is that writing that boring code is part of the journey to mastery. If you haven't crossed the inflection point, a backwards slide in skills will result in less competence and more confidence, which is a scary thought given how software runs the world.