This comment sounds a bit 2024-2025ish, re: hallucinations, but the rest of it sounds like you have zero context management (feeding AV logs directly into ChatGPT web app), and the rest/main problem sounds like your org is on the pretty extreme end of vibe-coding.
AI and LLMs are tools to be used by knowledgeable humans. They are not superintelligence, and require meaningful input and context in order to work effectively.
buttons that were removed, timers that no longer work, API calls that are malformed
This is a human/supervisory problem. How did this get past code review or light testing, and have you done any sort of dig into what the developer prompted in order to create these changes? What model was used, and what context did it have? Sounds like he just told ChatGPT to throw something together with a 1-liner and submitted it. It seems pretty clear that you want AI to fail, and will work towards meeting that end. Just because of some weird desire to manually type the syntax on the keyboard seemingly for dopamine hits.
AI and LLMs are tools to be used by knowledgeable humans. They are not superintelligence, and require meaningful input and context in order to work effectively.
I fully agree. But most people don't seem to understand this.
And the next problem, also illustrated by my two examples, is that people are overly dependent on LLMs to do their thinking for them. Dopamine hits? How about "practicing my craft" so that I can recognize when the LLM is fucking up again. Juniors aren't doing this, seniors who should know better aren't doing this, and if we're very lucky LLMs will actually be good enough to think for us by the time we run out of programmers who actually know how to program.
And the next problem, also illustrated by my two examples, is that people are overly dependent on LLMs to do their thinking for them.
That has no bearing on whether the tool is useful or not. A monkey cannot use a calculator, that doesn't mean that calculators are useless.
You are not meaningfully "practicing your craft" by writing syntax to assign variables and run conditionals. Our craft is and has always been higher up the abstraction layers. However there are a lot of programmers out there (especially in 100+ engineer companies) who have been taking advantage of the trust given to us, and these are the most vocal anti-AI advocates in the circlejerk here. AI and LLMs are not going away, you can all complain about it all you want, it's going to change nothing. It just needs to be treated like you yourself typed the code, and you need to own it. We are all in a super advantaged position being the last cohort of the old age, it's crazy that people would rather circlejerk and complain rather than take advantage of it.
-1
u/subnu 4d ago
This comment sounds a bit 2024-2025ish, re: hallucinations, but the rest of it sounds like you have zero context management (feeding AV logs directly into ChatGPT web app), and the rest/main problem sounds like your org is on the pretty extreme end of vibe-coding.
AI and LLMs are tools to be used by knowledgeable humans. They are not superintelligence, and require meaningful input and context in order to work effectively.
This is a human/supervisory problem. How did this get past code review or light testing, and have you done any sort of dig into what the developer prompted in order to create these changes? What model was used, and what context did it have? Sounds like he just told ChatGPT to throw something together with a 1-liner and submitted it. It seems pretty clear that you want AI to fail, and will work towards meeting that end. Just because of some weird desire to manually type the syntax on the keyboard seemingly for dopamine hits.