It's clear that AI assisted coding is dividing developers (welcome to the culture wars!).
-
@jeffmcneill @plexus @ttntm I would add the caveat that, for some, just like the fabric weavers of old who just wanted to put food on the table using a skill they had (aka luddites) it WAS an existential crisis. They starved, their children got chewed up by the machines, it’s only their grandchildren that started to prosper from the new productivity that increased the size of pie.
-
@grishka Right on, and then consider that with the traditional mode of writing software, the cost of creating something that is good is very high.
I'd argue that with faster (machine assisted) software creation, it is easier to meet the need of users because the cost of change is drastically reduced. I'm experiencing that with those system that I'm currently writing that way.
The whole argument that software written by humans is better does not bear any merit for me.
@hanshuebner @grishka May I suggest that software written by a skilled human with or without an llm tool is better than similarly complex software written by an unskilled human.
A skilled human with an llm tool will do just fine. A skilled human working with conventional tools will do fine. An unskilled human without an llm tool will generally fail. An unskilled human with an llm tool will generally be worse than the other three options.
This biases human code to be statistically better.
-
@tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner @dalias So you're saying you'd prefer slanted research as long as it favors your point of view that "AI is bad"? That wall of text you wrote basically oversimplifies everything to a negative bias.
Even Anthropic acknowledged that this is from Claude users, but you discount the weight of the opinions of people simply because of that?
And the sample size is more than sufficiently large to be considered rigorous.
-
It's clear that AI assisted coding is dividing developers (welcome to the culture wars!). I've seen a few blog posts now that talk about how some people just "love the craft", "delight in making something just right, like knitting", etc, as opposed to people who just "want to make it work". As if that explains the divide.
How about this, some people resent the notion of being a babysitter to a stochastic token machine, hastening their own cognitive decline. Some people resent paying rent to a handful of US companies, all coming directly out of the TESCREAL human extinction cult, to be able to write software. Some people resent the "worse is better" steady decline of software quality over the past two decades, now supercharged. Some people resent that the hegemonic computing ecosystem is entirely shaped by the logic of venture capital. Some people hate that the digital commons is walled off and sold back to us. Oh and I guess some people also don't like the thought of making coding several orders of magnitude more energy intensive during a climate emergency.
But sure, no, it's really because we mourn the loss of our hobby.
nagel on the kop
-
It's clear that AI assisted coding is dividing developers (welcome to the culture wars!). I've seen a few blog posts now that talk about how some people just "love the craft", "delight in making something just right, like knitting", etc, as opposed to people who just "want to make it work". As if that explains the divide.
How about this, some people resent the notion of being a babysitter to a stochastic token machine, hastening their own cognitive decline. Some people resent paying rent to a handful of US companies, all coming directly out of the TESCREAL human extinction cult, to be able to write software. Some people resent the "worse is better" steady decline of software quality over the past two decades, now supercharged. Some people resent that the hegemonic computing ecosystem is entirely shaped by the logic of venture capital. Some people hate that the digital commons is walled off and sold back to us. Oh and I guess some people also don't like the thought of making coding several orders of magnitude more energy intensive during a climate emergency.
But sure, no, it's really because we mourn the loss of our hobby.
@plexus I object to doing my job badly, especially when my actual job changes from "building software" to "taking the blame for LLMs' mistakes."
-
@tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner @dalias So you're saying you'd prefer slanted research as long as it favors your point of view that "AI is bad"? That wall of text you wrote basically oversimplifies everything to a negative bias.
Even Anthropic acknowledged that this is from Claude users, but you discount the weight of the opinions of people simply because of that?
And the sample size is more than sufficiently large to be considered rigorous.
@neal @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner Slanted research? The "slanted research" is that which was funded by a party with a financial interest in a particular outcome.
All of the real researchers have been defunded/fired for publishing things that reflected poorly on the industry, going all the way back to Timnit Gebru.
Do better.
-
@neal @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner Slanted research? The "slanted research" is that which was funded by a party with a financial interest in a particular outcome.
All of the real researchers have been defunded/fired for publishing things that reflected poorly on the industry, going all the way back to Timnit Gebru.
Do better.
@dalias @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner You do better, too. So far I've seen nothing from this thread that attempts to connect with people in a way that would make them want to consider your position. I have been wary of this tech. But as an "ordinary" freelance software engineer, the pressure to be as good as a genius is real.
I've already stated this once before in another thread, and I'll say it again here: your way of communicating this is making people consider the opposite as reasonable.
-
It's clear that AI assisted coding is dividing developers (welcome to the culture wars!). I've seen a few blog posts now that talk about how some people just "love the craft", "delight in making something just right, like knitting", etc, as opposed to people who just "want to make it work". As if that explains the divide.
How about this, some people resent the notion of being a babysitter to a stochastic token machine, hastening their own cognitive decline. Some people resent paying rent to a handful of US companies, all coming directly out of the TESCREAL human extinction cult, to be able to write software. Some people resent the "worse is better" steady decline of software quality over the past two decades, now supercharged. Some people resent that the hegemonic computing ecosystem is entirely shaped by the logic of venture capital. Some people hate that the digital commons is walled off and sold back to us. Oh and I guess some people also don't like the thought of making coding several orders of magnitude more energy intensive during a climate emergency.
But sure, no, it's really because we mourn the loss of our hobby.
@plexus yeah the boosters always cherry-pick the most emotional, irrational-sounding arguments they can find. All this time before this craze, I felt like development had shed so many of its old problems, where all the major programming languages, frameworks and even many IDEs are open source. The having people try to drag us back into the dark old world of expensive tools, subscriptions and vendor lock-in. I’m fine with neural nets as such! I’ve worked with them for over a decade.
-
@dalias @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner You do better, too. So far I've seen nothing from this thread that attempts to connect with people in a way that would make them want to consider your position. I have been wary of this tech. But as an "ordinary" freelance software engineer, the pressure to be as good as a genius is real.
I've already stated this once before in another thread, and I'll say it again here: your way of communicating this is making people consider the opposite as reasonable.
@dalias @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner I would prefer if we as software engineers were valued for our labor and capabilities. I would prefer if software engineers were required to understand the ethics of their decision-making. I would prefer if every software developer was required to justify their efforts contextually with a full software development and maintenance lifecycle.
But alas, we don't. Working incrementally to make those things a reality is all I can do.
-
@dalias @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner You do better, too. So far I've seen nothing from this thread that attempts to connect with people in a way that would make them want to consider your position. I have been wary of this tech. But as an "ordinary" freelance software engineer, the pressure to be as good as a genius is real.
I've already stated this once before in another thread, and I'll say it again here: your way of communicating this is making people consider the opposite as reasonable.
@neal @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner When you cite clearly biased industry-sponsored "research" as a credible source, it makes it hard to believe you have the same goals and values on this as I do.
And a belief that we do have shared goals and values is a necessary prerequisite for taking serious any advice you might give on how to achieve those goals.
Without that it comes across as concern trolling.
-
It's clear that AI assisted coding is dividing developers (welcome to the culture wars!). I've seen a few blog posts now that talk about how some people just "love the craft", "delight in making something just right, like knitting", etc, as opposed to people who just "want to make it work". As if that explains the divide.
How about this, some people resent the notion of being a babysitter to a stochastic token machine, hastening their own cognitive decline. Some people resent paying rent to a handful of US companies, all coming directly out of the TESCREAL human extinction cult, to be able to write software. Some people resent the "worse is better" steady decline of software quality over the past two decades, now supercharged. Some people resent that the hegemonic computing ecosystem is entirely shaped by the logic of venture capital. Some people hate that the digital commons is walled off and sold back to us. Oh and I guess some people also don't like the thought of making coding several orders of magnitude more energy intensive during a climate emergency.
But sure, no, it's really because we mourn the loss of our hobby.
@plexus I mean, I *do* also mourn the loss of my hobby
-
@neal @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner When you cite clearly biased industry-sponsored "research" as a credible source, it makes it hard to believe you have the same goals and values on this as I do.
And a belief that we do have shared goals and values is a necessary prerequisite for taking serious any advice you might give on how to achieve those goals.
Without that it comes across as concern trolling.
@dalias @tiotasram @matt @hanshuebner My *point* is that it isn't a topic the AI labs are ignoring, because they would be absolutely stupid to ignore it. But just saying "no AI" isn't going to work anymore. There needs to be a framework to push things in a direction that improves the value for society and the world.
Even the environmental angle is something that people are looking at: https://arxiv.org/abs/2603.21419
We're at the beginning of something, and everything sucks at the beginning, sadly.
-
@plexus I mean, I *do* also mourn the loss of my hobby
@jack fair enough
but you can still practice your hobby! I don't immediately see you ending up in a position where your manager is putting you on a PIP cause you're not reaching your token quota. -
It's clear that AI assisted coding is dividing developers (welcome to the culture wars!). I've seen a few blog posts now that talk about how some people just "love the craft", "delight in making something just right, like knitting", etc, as opposed to people who just "want to make it work". As if that explains the divide.
How about this, some people resent the notion of being a babysitter to a stochastic token machine, hastening their own cognitive decline. Some people resent paying rent to a handful of US companies, all coming directly out of the TESCREAL human extinction cult, to be able to write software. Some people resent the "worse is better" steady decline of software quality over the past two decades, now supercharged. Some people resent that the hegemonic computing ecosystem is entirely shaped by the logic of venture capital. Some people hate that the digital commons is walled off and sold back to us. Oh and I guess some people also don't like the thought of making coding several orders of magnitude more energy intensive during a climate emergency.
But sure, no, it's really because we mourn the loss of our hobby.
@plexus
I agree with all of this, but also I'm definitely one of the "love the craft", "delight in making something just right, like knitting" people! -
@jack fair enough
but you can still practice your hobby! I don't immediately see you ending up in a position where your manager is putting you on a PIP cause you're not reaching your token quota.@plexus @jack as someone who is simultaneously mourning the lost craft and excited to learn a powerful new tool, I don't think the token quotas are the problem. The problem is the tool works. The marketing hype is still BS of course but LLMs really does mechanize the production of a great deal of code.
-
R relay@relay.mycrowd.ca shared this topic
