Comment on Exactly Six Months Ago, the CEO of Anthropic Said That in Six Months AI Would Be Writing 90 Percent of Code

• Mniot@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

  Executives are mostly irrelevant as long as they’re not forcing the whole company into the bullshit.

  I’m seeing a lot of this, though. Like, I’m not technically required to use AI, but the VP will send me a message noting that I’ve only used 2k tokens this month and maybe I could get more done if I was using more…?

  source

  • expr@programming.dev ⁨5⁩ ⁨hours⁩ ago

    Yeah, fortunately while our CTO is giddy like a schoolboy about LLMs, he hasn’t actually attempted to force it on anyone, thankfully.

    Unfortunately, a number of my peers now seem to have become irreparably LLM-brained.

    source
• jj4211@lemmy.world ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  Based on my experience, I’m skeptical someone that seemingly delegates their reasoning to an LLM were really good engineers in the first place.

  Whenever I’ve tried, it’s been so useless that I can’t really develop a reflex, since it would have to actually help for me to get used to just letting it do it’s thing.

  Meanwhile the people who are very bullish who are ostensibly the good engineers that I’ve worked with are the people who became pet engineers of executives and basically have long succeeded by sounding smart to those executives rather than doing anything or even providing concrete technical leadership. They are more like having something akin to Gartner on staff, except without even the data that at least Gartner actually gathers, even as Gartner is a useless entity with respect to actual guidance.

  source
• auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

  I mean before we’d just ask google and read stack, blogs, support posts, etc. Now it just finds them for you instantly so you can just click and read them. The human reasoning part is just shifting elsewhere where you solve the problem during debugging before commits.

  source

  • expr@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    No, good engineers were not constantly googling problems because for most topics, either the answer is trivial enough that experienced engineers could answer them immediately, or complex and specific enough to the company/architecture/task/whatever that Googling it would not be useful. Stack overflow and the like has always only ever really been useful as the occasional memory aid for basic things that you don’t use often enough to remember how to do. Good engineers were, and still are, reasoning through problems, reading documentation, and iteratively piecing together system-level comprehension.

    The nature of the situation hasn’t changed at all: problems are still either trivial enough that an LLM is pointless, or complex and specific enough that an LLM will get it wrong. The only difference is that an LLM will spit out plausible-sounding bullshit and convince people it’s valuable when it is, in fact, not.

    source

    • auraithx@lemmy.dbzer0.com ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

      In the case of a senior engineer then they wouldn’t need to worry about the hallucination rate. The LLM is a lot faster than them and they can do other tasks while it’s being generated and then review the outputs. If it’s trivial you’ve saved time, if not, you can pull up that documentation, and reason and step through the problem with the LLM. If you actually know what you’re talking about you can see when it slips up and correct it.

      And that hallucination rate is rapidly dropping. We’ve jumped from about 40% accuracy to 90% over the past ~6mo alone (aider polygot coding benchmark) - at about 1/10th the cost (iirc).

      source

      • Feyd@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

        it’s trivial you’ve saved time, if not, you can pull up that documentation, and reason and step through the problem with the LLM

        Insane that just writing the code isn’t even an option in your mind

        source

        • -> View More Comments
  • Feyd@programming.dev ⁨1⁩ ⁨day⁩ ago

    “Stack overflow engineer” has been a derogatory forever lol

    source