I always see posts like this and don’t understand. I use AI successfully for code every day. Do y’all just not know how to ask the right questions? Is this one of those things where if it isn’t 100% effective in every situation it’s crap?
I think the point is that the profit motive, along with the massive damage LLMs cause to the environment and intellectual property, is not worth saving a few programmers some time doing their job.
I once submitted some LLM-generated code to my boss to see if he thought it lived up to company standards (I’m not a dev, so I was genuinely curious). He told me the code would technically work, but it was incredibly messy, ugly, inelegant, and prone to future issues. He said it would have taken him maybe 5 minutes to write it from scratch at the quality he expects from his devs.
A flat head screw driver is still an effective tool even though it can’t work with hex screws. If you are using a tool that doesn’t understand angle brackets on something that requires angle brackets, the problem isn’t the tool. It’s the user who can’t manage their own expectations.
“You’re an idiot if you don’t know the right LLM to use to code with even though they all say you can do that” is not the selling point you think it is.
“they” isn’t a rando or employee of one of these AI companies right? And why are you fabricating quotes? I’m just trying to show something can be an effective tool even if it doesn’t meet your specific expectations.
Apparently not Microsoft’s generative AI. Despite their claims. You seem to think Microsoft is blameless and only wants the best for people rather than just a megacorporation that scams people to make money, which is weird considering that’s been Microsoft’s modus operandi for decades.
I always see posts like this and don’t understand. I use AI successfully for code every day. Do y’all just not know how to ask the right questions? Is this one of those things where if it isn’t 100% effective in every situation it’s crap?
I think the point is that the profit motive, along with the massive damage LLMs cause to the environment and intellectual property, is not worth saving a few programmers some time doing their job.
I once submitted some LLM-generated code to my boss to see if he thought it lived up to company standards (I’m not a dev, so I was genuinely curious). He told me the code would technically work, but it was incredibly messy, ugly, inelegant, and prone to future issues. He said it would have taken him maybe 5 minutes to write it from scratch at the quality he expects from his devs.
I mean I’m no master coder, but I’m pretty sure angle brackets are really important in a lot of languages.
A flat head screw driver is still an effective tool even though it can’t work with hex screws. If you are using a tool that doesn’t understand angle brackets on something that requires angle brackets, the problem isn’t the tool. It’s the user who can’t manage their own expectations.
“You’re an idiot if you don’t know the right LLM to use to code with even though they all say you can do that” is not the selling point you think it is.
“they” isn’t a rando or employee of one of these AI companies right? And why are you fabricating quotes? I’m just trying to show something can be an effective tool even if it doesn’t meet your specific expectations.
By insulting the user rather than the creator who makes promises that can’t be kept.
¯_(ツ)_/¯
Generative AI is an effective coding assistant
Apparently not Microsoft’s generative AI. Despite their claims. You seem to think Microsoft is blameless and only wants the best for people rather than just a megacorporation that scams people to make money, which is weird considering that’s been Microsoft’s modus operandi for decades.