I'm absolutely baffled by it as someone who started their college career in computer science before switching majors. I was never the best programmer, yet it seems so ass-backwards to me modern programmers aren't writing pseudo-code and working things out on paper. I wasn't in school that long ago. Did things really change that fast? Are people not doing formal logic anymore? Do they even learn binary and hex? Just what the fuck is happening to this field.
My impression is that the people who are most excited about these tools are people like tech journalists and "solopreneurs" (gag), who have been tech adjacent but never formally learned to code and now think that they don't need software engineers to achieve their vision anymore.
this. llm code is the silver bullet for "idea guys"
I'm imagining a comedy with this dialog...
"Am I a programmer? A lowly programmer? Of course not! I'm an ideas guy." As the plot unfolds - it turns out the guy has no idea how to do anything. All he does is enter AI prompts and then lie that he has yet another fantastic idea.
I was never the best programmer, yet it seems so ass-backwards to me modern programmers aren't writing pseudo-code and working things out on paper
Not a programmer, but as someone whose master's degree is filled with "write 30 pages worth of documentation before starting a project" when you are actually working in the real world, half that shit goes out of the window. So, I can definitely see how a lot of people are not writing pseudocode and instead brute forcing a bunch of things.
I was self-taught programming before I started my college career similarly (also switched majors except I dropped out) and I don't usually do pseudo-code. I guess I kinda do in my head or write out a plan for how it should work. I also don't usually do very big projects either. I've tried OS dev, but I have a hard time expanding beyond the tutorials on the wiki and keeping things organized and actually working. Mostly now I just write. (switched majors to literary studies)
I never went to school for programming but I’ve worked as a dev for almost a decade. I do know binary, hex, and formal logic, but almost never use them. I’ve never written code on paper, but I’ve written informal flow diagrams on a whiteboard and on excalidraw. And my pseudo code is usually just writing out actual code where the method doesn’t exist yet. But I’ve never written pseudo English out to plan what I was doing. I’ve talked about code in pseudo code speak but mostly when other people are piloting on screen share.
The thing is, our entire field is bad at what we do. For most of the software the cost of error is very low, and for a long time it was a very lucrative field that attracted a lot of people who were really bad at coding. So coding with AI is not significantly different from coding without AI, it’s just that there’s now a much faster, and much less ethically acceptable way of producing code.
50% of developers have less than 5 years of experience and the number of new developers just keeps growing too. We’re a profession of amateurs with companies poaching the oldheads out from underneath each other.
The free models are much worse than the $500 per user/month enterprise ones. I have seen these be able to generate working features first hand at work, and I cannot deny that certain models are capable of implementing features when appropriate requirements are provided. To claim anything else would be to deny what I have seen with my own eyes.
However, therein lies the trap. Just because it is capable of achieving the provided task in one instance, doesn't mean that it always provides an appropriate answer or solution in all cases.
But those who have initially used it successfully tend to start believing its output uncritically. I've noticed this on myself when I tried it at work, and I think this is basic human, heck, even animal condition. You are naturally inclined to trust an entity that initially provides you with beneficial output. You become less critical, as the output often sounds informed and convincing, and in many cases provably works as well (especially when a robust testing framework exists inside the project. its only through unit and integration tests that these AIs can even reliably implement features).
But this leads to an increasing reliance on the tech, and you stop being capable of arguing why the solution it generated works. You have to put in active effort to question what it's doing, and you have no way of knowing whether it's telling you the truth or lies, because it has no motive, and researching the facts can take so long that it completely defeats the point of automation. So it ends up being rather self-defeating in many cases, and can leave you less capable of solving problems yourself.
I think the most useful application for it personally is to use it for debugging -- feed it a cryptic error message, and it will usually generate an answer that, while not necessarily accurate, can give you more pointers to find the true answer, much better than most search engines can.
I mean deepseek will make you working programs for 20 cents of tokens sometimes if the requirements are straightforward and it's nothing too exotic.
I have a very close friend who is an engineer for programming(idk what the title is rn) at a very large company.
He says he has managed to keep one or two codebases "AI free" but when I asked if he has to review any AI code he said it's completely unavoidable and everyone uses it now. He's proud of the fact that they still require the coder to actually review the AI generated slop before passing it off to him.
It's bleak
This, except in my case there's no reviewer, I either review or do the rest of my work. Someone in my team is really a broker with the AI and he has such a bad grasp on the core of our codebase that I've had to spend several days refactoring the AI's vomit just to get something mildly performant (it's graphics-related code). It's clear when making new things that he just doesn't plan for the future and every new piece of code is just a hack to deliver the feature, instead of discussing the code with the others at least. Worst part is that there is seemingly no end to this
Yeah. My buddy is, luckily for him, able to dictate a lot of things still
This is such a key point you make—quality of search results and available info to use to solve a problem have degraded so far that you almost have to rely on web search enables AI to do what you used to be able to do on your own, and in both cases now you have to engage a lot of extra effort in trying to discern if the information is at all useful.
And like you say, the situation will only recursively get worse as the two feed on each other further destroying informational value.
Very much this - I used to rely a lot in tutorials, devlogs etc to learn new patterns etc, but now search is so bad that LLMs are basically the only game in town
With coding it's easier to deceive yourself that the AI is doing a good job. There are tons of tools out there that can detect various kinds of problems in code and the AI can call those tools and change stuff until the warnings go away. So the code might look alright on first glance. Then half the time people don't even understand the code they wrote themselves so they just look at changes across 50 different files and be like: fuck it, how much do I really care if this company goes up in flames?
Its fine for boilerplate simple programs. However, it will often make mistakes even for those, so you have to know what you are looking at. Still saves time, though idk if the actual energy usage etc., is actually saving you time and money without free money existing.
However, I have seen people write big programs with it and then be surprised that they don't work. Even more worrying though is when they do work, but then I walk through whoever wrote it and they cannot explain how or why it is working.
Its real engineering logic.
though idk if the actual energy usage etc., is actually saving you time and money without free money existing.
llm end-user energy consumption is pretty low. probably depends on the provider rates and your dev salaries.
Yeah but inference cannot exist without the prohibitively expensive up-front cost of training. And of course the larger the model the more costly the inference. That's why you read stories like "new trend in SV: pay in tokens." Opus 4.6 is gonna mop the floor with a 2B param model designed to run on an edge PC, but the cost of getting to the point that it can be used, and actually using it, is still very high.
I've used it to create some simple scripts to do some tedious shit that I didn't feel like coding myself but nothing serious or professional. For example:
"Here is a big file that has a bunch of data in it but I only need points X,Y,Z, formatted in a JSON which I have provided an example of. Write me a simple python script to do that."
Works okay for that stuff. Always desk check it with edge cases.
The AI is right. Just delete that shit and install freeBSD.
It can help with tedious but relatively non complex work or maybe speed up some exploratory work, anything else and it's going to make ridiculous mistakes. It's a useful tool occasionally but nothing I'd lose sleep over if it disappeared.
Anything that is even remotely a novel problem AI can't solve. It doesn't have the training data for your specific problem. At best it'll do a web crawl for you and summarize its findings.
If you want to really pull your hair out take a look at AGENTS.md or SKILLS.md. State of the art agentic coding practices: glorified README.md files. (the ai frequently doesn't bother to read them).
I will say one thing nice about LLMs: they are fairly "human" in the sense that they error in familiar ways. In a way AI is automated human error.
It's not that different than using Stack for parts or boilerplate code (since AI probably just stole from that anyways). So you still need to know what's going on unless you literally just keep throwing prompts at every error for 3 hours until it magically works.
I use AI mostly to troubleshoot all of the vague errors that come out of python or SQL, not to write my entire code. It's a [relatively shitty] tool, not an 'I Win' button that everybody claims it is.
Similarly, I like having it summarize search results and I can click into the actual relevant links. But yea it's pretty garbage most of the time. I'm definitely on team 'fuck ai'; I lived without it before, I can live without it again
They do. Most programmers think they're above average (there were actual statistics on this, maybe from stackoverflow survey) and are mediocre enough that they find it useful/faster long term.
I'm statistically likely to be mediocre myself, but I would rather try to improve than relying on LLMs. Every single coworker I work with who is actually above average hates the forced AI usage.
i said this before but it's very good at making you feel like you're accomplishing something, but you will inevitably hit a wall with any ai project where it just can't meaningfully contribute anymore. you can work around this issue to an extent by getting really good at you know like project management and splitting your thing up into smaller and smaller chunks but eventually you'll then cross the second wall which is where you're putting in way more effort prompting the AI than you would have spent just doing it yourself
I found that in coding same as with creative writing the best use for the AI is as a parrot because you know if you're hitting writer's block or if you're trying to flesh out an idea all you need is something to like kind of spit your own words back at you to kind of help you shake yourself out of that so using an AI as like a sounding board for your ideas I think is somewhat valuable use or using it as a search engine but even the search engine use is only there because search engines have gotten so shitty
I still take a peak at /r/selfhosted sometimes and the situation is dire. The mods have completely given into the slop trough.
You gotta use AI like it's a new guy you're training at work where every single thing you tell them to do they'll probably do wrong but you have to pay attention and learn their specific fucked up brain so you can anticipate their path of fuck up
My coworkers range from "Claude can find errors in my code" to "Yeah I just copy-paste everything from chatgpt". Those like the former at least can still submit legible code (for now). Those like the latter submit random gibberish and have no idea how it works.
I'm using AI for the first time to make simple numbered lists with names. The lists vary from 100 to several hundred entries.
I have to repeatedly ask chatgpt to double and triple check its work and then end up manually counting, editing and doing a lot of the work anyways. Frustrating
for what it's worth i'd rather program a filesystem from scratch than troubleshoot someone's cursed computer and the janky setup they need to barely run a video game but that's besides the point, AI is abysmal dogshit, yes
i've been using deepseek to make a d&d module to play with some friends, with the amount of editing and tweaking i've had to do on the prompts and what it spits out imagining people using it for coding freaks me out a little
Keep in mind that it'll always regress to the most average output when you try to use it for creative endeavors. It sandblasts ideas into a nice round shape that's identical to every other idea it works on.
Me too. I've been using it to write some scripts to automate stuff, and I've inevitably had to tweak or try something.
It saves me the work of working from scratch and looking up which libraries do what I want to do, but I wouldn't let it get anywhere close to something I care about without some heavy auditing.
have you considered that computers are very clever and maybe deleting sys32.dll would work
yes, people are writing code with AI. I use claude code and it has built a couple of things for me. But they are nowhere near production level.
It's probably related to the reason why your Start button took a vacation lol
hmmm maybe user error. deepseek is really useful in helping with troubleshooting and linux stuff
We use AI at my coding job and our codebase has a lot of safeguards to make sure the AI isn’t spitting out garbage. Every time it makes a commit, it runs the linter, the static analysis tool, and the unit test suite which is pretty extensive. Every time it makes a mistake in spite of these things being present, we update our agents file until it can consistently get that thing right (this is sometimes limited by the overall capabilities of the model).
In other words, it has a good set of default instructions that tells it what we expect of it, we all share tips on how to prompt it in ways it will respond well to, and when it inevitably slops out some shit anyway, it has a lot of automatic tooling to tell it to fuck off instead of us having to review every intermediate step. We also have a requirement of signing off that you’ve read and understand the code it writes before opening a PR. It’s not perfect but it’s a lot more reliable than a naked chat bot
Who writes the unit tests though? If the AI is eventually writing those too because the devs have gotten too reliant on the AI, then it defeats the whole point. And in the case that the devs are mainly writing unit tests as a spec for the AI, it's a pretty miserable experience compared to how development was before.
Most of the time, the AI will spit out a first draft of unit tests and I’ll go in to clean them up and review them a bit before letting it proceed. It gets it like 80% of the way there and is indeed faster, though not the 10x or 100x that the hypebeasts claim. I’ve seen a study that claims about a 30% increase in initial speed in large codebases and that about checks out to me. At its worst it writes the boilerplate for me. At its best it one-shots a feature or fix for me.
There’s a lot more spec writing and code review than before, so if you’re not into that I can understand why you wouldn’t like working with AI. But we’ve become a lot more responsive to tickets and have cleared out a huge chunk of our backlog. I’m generally not big on AI and I’ve been going out of my way to not use it on personal projects because I don’t want my skills to rot. But they do pay for it and require its use at work so I’ve done my best to make the best of it. I just don’t agree with the people who haven’t used it in a professional context and insist that it has no use and is never advantageous.
Have you noticed any degradation in your own coding or any resistance to coding without an LLM on personal projects?
ive used AI like twice to write a powershell script, and it worked very well. but it was for very low impact stuff(example, I had to remove Teams from a shared conference room computer and it was installed to everyone windows profile)
The answer to your question question is, simply, yes. The slop is everywhere.
Last time I used it, for some fluids problem, it couldn’t even do simple calculations correctly. It the final number was off by two significant digits lol
For the love of god never ask an LLM to do math. That's the exact opposite of their function.
technology
On the road to fully automated luxury gay space communism.
Spreading Linux propaganda since 2020
- Ways to run Microsoft/Adobe and more on Linux
- The Ultimate FOSS Guide For Android
- Great libre software on Windows
- Hey you, the lib still using Chrome. Read this post!
Rules:
- 1. Obviously abide by the sitewide code of conduct. Bigotry will be met with an immediate ban
- 2. This community is about technology. Offtopic is permitted as long as it is kept in the comment sections
- 3. Although this is not /c/libre, FOSS related posting is tolerated, and even welcome in the case of effort posts
- 4. We believe technology should be liberating. As such, avoid promoting proprietary and/or bourgeois technology
- 5. Explanatory posts to correct the potential mistakes a comrade made in a post of their own are allowed, as long as they remain respectful
- 6. No crypto (Bitcoin, NFT, etc.) speculation, unless it is purely informative and not too cringe
- 7. Absolutely no tech bro shit. If you have a good opinion of Silicon Valley billionaires please manifest yourself so we can ban you.
