←back to thread

416 points floverfelt | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0.3s | source
Show context
jeppester ◴[] No.45057505[source]
In my company I feel that we getting totally overrun with code that's 90% good, 10% broken and almost exactly what was needed.

We are producing more code, but quality is definitely taking a hit now that no-one is able to keep up.

So instead of slowly inching towards the result we are getting 90% there in no time, and then spending lots and lots of time on getting to know the code and fixing and fine-tuning everything.

Maybe we ARE faster than before, but it wouldn't surprise me if the two approaches are closer than what one might think.

What bothers me the most is that I much prefer to build stuff rather than fixing code I'm not intimately familiar with.

replies(8): >>45057537 #>>45058508 #>>45061118 #>>45061272 #>>45061732 #>>45062347 #>>45065856 #>>45070745 #
epolanski ◴[] No.45057537[source]
As Fowler himself states, there's a need to learn to use these tools properly.

In any case poor work quality is a failure of tech leadership and culture, it's not AI's fault.

replies(1): >>45058751 #
FromTheFirstIn ◴[] No.45058751[source]
It’s funny how nothing seems to be AI’s fault.
replies(5): >>45060536 #>>45060602 #>>45060685 #>>45061146 #>>45062496 #
johnnienaked ◴[] No.45060536[source]
No one seems to be able to grasp the possibility that AI is a failure
replies(3): >>45060690 #>>45060691 #>>45061671 #
colordrops ◴[] No.45060691[source]
You've failed to figure out when and how to use it. It's not a binary failed/succeeded thing.
replies(2): >>45060823 #>>45060849 #
1. johnnienaked ◴[] No.45060849[source]
Metaverse was...