Survey: a third of senior developers say over half their code is AI-generated

Seems about right for me (older developer at a big tech company). But we need to define what it means that the code is AI-generated. In my case, I typically know how I want the code to look like, and I'm writing a prompt to tell the agent to do it. The AI doesn't solve any problem, it just does the typing and helps with syntax. I'm not even sure I'm ultimately more productive.

Yeah I’m still not more productive. Maybe 10% more. But it alleviates a lot of mental energy, which is very nice at the age of 40.

For all the folks on the "reduce mental burden", "reduce cognitive load" train, are you all aware that this basically means you are exercising less your brain day in and day out, and in the end you will forget how to do things? You will learn how to guide an AI agent, but until the day an AI agent is perfect (and we don't know if we will ever see that day), you are just losing inch by inch your ability to actually understand what the agent is writing and what is going on.

I'm pretty radical on this topic but for me cognitive load is good, you are making your neurons work and keep synapses in place where they matter (at least for your job). I totally accept writing down doc or howto to make doing some action in future easier and reduce that cognitive load, but using AI agent IMO is like going to bike in the mountain with an electrical bike.

Yes, you keep seeing the wonderful vistas but you are not really training your legs.

This, to me, feels like you're complaining to the 45 year old builder that they should be using a hammer instead of a nail gun.

I know how to nail a nail, I've nailed so many nails that I can't remember them all.

My job is to build a house efficiently, not nail nails. Anything that can make me more efficient at it is a net positive.

Now I've saved 2 hours in the framing process by using a nail gun, I have 2 extra hours to do things that need my experience. Maybe spot the contractor using a nail plate in the wrong way or help the apprentice on their hammering technique.

IMO it's different. That's why I brought the e-bike similitude: climbing even mild mountains or hills with your own legs will actually make your legs, heart and lungs stronger in the process. So you get both the wonderful views (building the house or delivering the software) but also you get improved health (keeping your mind trained on both high level thinking and low level implementation vs high level only). We might say that using a hammer constantly will develop more your muscles, but in carpentry there are still plenty of manual work that will develop your muscles anyway. (and we still don't have bricks laying machines)

Ironically, e-bikes, at least in the EU, are having the exact opposite effect. More people that don't normally ride bikes are using e-bikes to get about. The motor functions not as a replacement, but as a force multiplier. It also makes "experimenting" easier, because the motor can make up for any mistakes or wrong turns.

Caveat: In the EU, an e-bike REQUIRES some physical effort any time for the motor to run. Throttles are illegal.

> Ironically, e-bikes, at least in the EU, are having the exact opposite effect. More people that don't normally ride bikes are using e-bikes to get about.

At least in Germany people rather joke that the moment e-bikes became popular, people began to realize that they suddenly became too unathletic to be capable of pedaling a bicycle. I know of no person who uses an e-bike who did not ride an ordinary bicycle before.

> In the EU, an e-bike REQUIRES some physical effort any time for the motor to run.

The motor must shut off when 25 km/h is reached - which is basically the speed that a trained cyclist can easily attain. So because of this red tape stuff, e-bikes are considered to be useless and expensive by cyclists who are not couch potatoes.