Guys this is the future!
Guys this is the future!
17 comments
-
loose
braing
I can see why he uses AI
-
Came here to say exactly this. 🤌🏼
-
Eh, English probably isn't his native language. I try to be pretty forgiving spelling and grammar on the Internet.
-
He should have used AI to help with his post then
-
-
-
"Startup Expert". Yeah, that checks out.
-
Has lots of experience starting things, yet doesn't look old. Hmmm.
-
I start a lot of stuff I never finish, does that make me a startup expert?
-
-
-
I'm not strictly against using LLMs for coding. However, every time I try, it makes me waste my time. I've tried auto complete, and it will often almost get it right, but not quite. So instead of getting to write the code, I go to write the code, stop to check if the auto complete is doing what I was thinking, see that it isn't, and then have to type it out anyway. I've tried using a chatbot for coding questions, but often times it will claim there isn't a way to use a given SDK to do what I want, but I will check the docs and there will be a way, so it just lies. I've tried having it generate code from a design, but having to write a strict design, and review all the code it produces, only to have to make pretty drastic changes tends not to save me any time, and means I have to spend the most time doing the parts of coding I hate the most: writing designs and code review.
So far, the AI coding tools make my life worse and don't save time, at least when writing code. It's pretty good at writing git messages and making my operational summaries sound nice, so I primarily use it for that
-
Ok, here’s a hot take. I’m avidly against generative AI. But I’m not against using LLMs to help assist with coding. Jetbrains offers a free LLM (they have a separate paid AI service too) to help with code completion, and it’s fairly good for repetitive stuff. It’s also hosted locally on your machine and not a cloud service.
That said, if people want to write boilerplate/template code with AI, fine. But it must be edited, tweaked, and reviewed by a human. This is no different than blindly copying and pasting from places like StackOverflow. You need to know and understand what’s being presented to you so you can know and understand what it’s going to do in your application.
Edit: forgot to lament that writing code is not the time-consuming part. It’s the editing, tweaking, and reviewing process that is. But what do I know? I’ve only been doing this for ~20 years professionally. 🤷♂️
-
I don't disagree with having it help out a little or be better at autocomplete but having worked with Databricks's Genie or whatever it's called I am just now annoyedly hitting backspace when it suggests something stupid again but enter also autocompletes rather than just tab.
-
I get it. As much as I love autocomplete, it’s not perfect. I like the LLM, but I’ve never used (nor do I plan to) an AI service.
Though I’ve been toying with the idea of creating my own local LLM. Maybe that would be better than Copilot or those other public services. 🤷♂️
-
-
-
You can code faster if you share a keyboard, of course.
-
....and you're getting a blowjob at the same time. But LLMs don't do that (yet!)
-
-
Dude, writing code is the fun part, reviewing code written by others is time-consuming, difficult and boring. Why would you automate the fun out of coding and force yourself to review even more shit?
-
Using AI on libraries you know inside and out (you know all the attributes of the classes you're working with and you know what the arguments are for every function) feels great. Using AI on libraries you're not familiar with will simply cause you to lose time because AI will give you code that returns different object types than the library is expecting. Then, instead of understanding why you're asking it to fix it, it will try variations of similar code and make up an excuse as to why now it's fixed, despite it having no clue what the problem was. Even if the code "runs" you'll have to refactor it anyways because code is not one size fits all.
It can be useful to sparking creativity but if you're not reading documentation you're just looking busy while not accomplishing much
-
-
this is the future
This is not necessarily wrong. This is a potential future of sorts.
But, as always, the usual implicit "future = good" is assumed by all involved.
One shall neither subscribe to progressive optimism when it comes to the future, nor expect the future to have a Whiggish outlook about us.
-
"startup expert". I rest my case.
17 comments