People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter.
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
@volpeon as long as it doesnt do anything security intensive and the person making it knows what the fuck the spaghetti is doing, sure. Though i prefer to avoid those since theyre usually full of AI ads
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
@volpeon I try not to be that strict about it, otherwise in our current timeline I might end up having to avoid almost all software and go back to living in a forest, I guess. But AI use does tell me something about a developer and what I can expect from their software in the future (usually a slow downward trend).
On the few occasions where I've tried an app whose developer is obviously on the AI hype train, it's been a strange experience. Like watching AI generated movies, it looks okay on the surface, and the deeper you go, the more things just don't make sense anymore...
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
@volpeon a better disclaimer would be "this software is/might be developed by wyverns" -
@volpeon a better disclaimer would be "this software is/might be developed by wyverns"
@sanek An indicator that the software is good and you can show your appreciation with pets
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
@volpeon The use of ai while developing software isn't bad by itself, but it very often correlates with the author being a fash-leaning techbro, and that's what is actually bad in this situation.
-
@sanek An indicator that the software is good and you can show your appreciation with pets
-
@volpeon The use of ai while developing software isn't bad by itself, but it very often correlates with the author being a fash-leaning techbro, and that's what is actually bad in this situation.
@petafloppa Fash-leaning techbros also use computers. Does this mean we're automatically fash-leaning techbros? I'd rather go by evidence of direct endorsement of fascism, not this.
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
Let me explain why "they use AI" is more often than not a meaningless statement to me. It certainly can be useful to point out — but only if it's truthful. The problem is that it very often isn't. People tend to exaggerate the degree AI is involved because they despise it, and so the dev writing "I used AI to bootstrap this project" on their blog becomes "this software is slop written by AI". There are many ways AI might be part of a project. Maybe the devs only used it to generate themselves a more tailored boilerplate. Maybe they do use it more, but hold themselves to high standards to ensure nothing bad happens. Maybe they vibecoded the whole thing. Maybe they accept AI-assisted contributions, but don't use it themselves. There's a whole lot of nuance that gets condensed into "absolutely zero AI involved" and "irredeemable trash". If you don't care about it, then so be it — but I do.
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
-
Let me explain why "they use AI" is more often than not a meaningless statement to me. It certainly can be useful to point out — but only if it's truthful. The problem is that it very often isn't. People tend to exaggerate the degree AI is involved because they despise it, and so the dev writing "I used AI to bootstrap this project" on their blog becomes "this software is slop written by AI". There are many ways AI might be part of a project. Maybe the devs only used it to generate themselves a more tailored boilerplate. Maybe they do use it more, but hold themselves to high standards to ensure nothing bad happens. Maybe they vibecoded the whole thing. Maybe they accept AI-assisted contributions, but don't use it themselves. There's a whole lot of nuance that gets condensed into "absolutely zero AI involved" and "irredeemable trash". If you don't care about it, then so be it — but I do.
@volpeon@icy.wyvern.rip fun fact, I use Ai sometimes as an assist.
I do not vibecode but sometimes using Ai for a step or walk through to assist in solving problems might help.
Also, everything ai spits out will be checked (and most often adjusted) by me.
Zero Ai is, IMO, a very hard thing to do nowadays -
Let me explain why "they use AI" is more often than not a meaningless statement to me. It certainly can be useful to point out — but only if it's truthful. The problem is that it very often isn't. People tend to exaggerate the degree AI is involved because they despise it, and so the dev writing "I used AI to bootstrap this project" on their blog becomes "this software is slop written by AI". There are many ways AI might be part of a project. Maybe the devs only used it to generate themselves a more tailored boilerplate. Maybe they do use it more, but hold themselves to high standards to ensure nothing bad happens. Maybe they vibecoded the whole thing. Maybe they accept AI-assisted contributions, but don't use it themselves. There's a whole lot of nuance that gets condensed into "absolutely zero AI involved" and "irredeemable trash". If you don't care about it, then so be it — but I do.
@volpeon I definitely get where you're coming from, but like, from my perspective, when GenAI gets used in a project we generally have no idea how deeply the Ai was involved and whether or not the developer gave a shit about making sure any AI-generated contributions were reviewed and accurate which introduces uncertainties about the user experience - and I don't deal well with uncertainties in stuff I'm used to using. These concerns then combine with also seeing the use of GenAI as problematic both morally and environmentally - so for me, AI usage in such projects ends up becoming a scarlet letter that makes my interest just evaporate.
-
People say "this software is/might be developed with AI" as if that magically means any actual experiences with the software don't matter. If it runs well, I will use it. If it doesn't — like anything Microsoft produces — I won't. It's that simple.
@volpeon@icy.wyvern.rip written in rust by ai that's also written in rust. If that's not blazing fast
then what is /s
