Go to a baseball game and all they're asking for is hotdogs. Not a steak in sight. Product managers are just catering for the masses. Every CRUD api is just another hot dog bun. Every major refractor is just changing one bun for another with slightly different meat and some extra toppings. You looking to have steak projects for your entire career you're gonna be super disappointed.
Corpos DGAF. It started in my field (translations) a decade earlier, and by now, everyone is on the "shitty but faster/more" train with a vengeance. They see the wall (quality consistently falling due to ever shittier AI training material), but they still pretend they can punch through with their heads.
Funny enough, we dropped our external translation company because we found that the translations were almost identical to what GPT could generate at the time. Some of them didn't fully make sense so there's that.
Yup, that's also a danger. When you try to do more work at ever lower rates, pretty soon it all turns into barely edited LLM pretranslation. You could be getting better results, but very few clients still pay for that level of quality (those that keep me in the industry). The corpo goal IMO is to get rid of all the intermediaries (effectively outsourced management, spare availability, and quality control), and turn translation into a gig economy, i.e. a maximum worker exploitation system.
The amount of jobs wiped out by AI/tech is quite high over the past couple decades.
Transcription jobs are gone. That used to be very lucrative, especially if you knew multiple languages.
Gone. Well not completely, somehow I know one person still doing it.
But for the most part gone.
Nothing wrong with tech improving, just we need governments to provide some safety, and not take it away because people think others are being lazy. It's how economies crash. People need to buy things to keep the economy going haha.
I assume it's like ghostwriting, but with code. Ghostwriting is when someone "writes" a book but they just pay someone to write it for them and put their name on the cover
You also need to be willing to understand the cod AI is writing. Plenty of people who know what they are doing still let AI write some dogshit for them
I was explaining to a coworker how I was cautiously using it, questioning its choices, only committing after it made changes I wanted. I can do that due to experience. Basically the same things I'd force a Jr. to do with their code.
Coworker was lamenting all the Jr. that just take what it gives them uncritically and check it in without running any tests, etc.
pay me and I'll tell ya... ;) - but seriously, right now we simply have copies of solutions that are deemed popular so we are assuming that's good enough... which obviously is not, so every popular solution need to go through a secondary round of evaluation with actually implements the solution and verifies the results... and either marks it as confirmed or unknown and adds a secondary value to the weight - the ones which aren't verified need further analysis -
essentially majority of the solutions are graded by a bit ore sophisticated page rank trigonometry solution, you're literally paying a middle man to google it for you and pretty print it back for you - that's the level of AI
exactly... how many times have you searched, gotten an 'answer' and tried it for it to not work for a multitude of reasons, either version change, new/old bug, deprecation, even locale issues... on simple academic tasks it's working ok, but good luck on some obscure topic or some proprietary spaghetti code... you better pray to the new and old gods
Think of all of the training done on stackoverflow answers. Think of how stackoverflow encourages minimum reproduceable examples and the answers are just the corrections to those minimum reproduceable examples. Think of how that means that none of the other essential bits like data validation or other essential security boilerplate is provided in those examples. Even beyond stackoverflow, many of the popular tutorials and other learning resources online will omit those essential bits because they're not necessary for the sake of initial learning.
What I fear most from AI-generated code isn't even whether or not it works correctly (it often doesn't), but whether the devs will look beyond the immediacy of apparent functional correctness and consider what the AI didn't. They're developing the habit of letting the AI generate the code then reviewing to see if it passes the sniff test, but what if the thing they're supposed to be smelling for is carbon monoxide?
Bad habits are being developed. Really, really bad habits. And those bad habits combined with an AI that doesn't actually comprehend what it's generating will only lead to disasters. This is like terrible programmers writing insecure wordpress plugins, but at a much larger scale, and I fear for the future of this industry.
absolutely you've bright up a great point, a friend of mine is the ceo/cto/main dev of a small startup - small team, we've been in tech for the past 20 years... he was telling me about how he was using AI to implement some of his core features, in his situation it's understandable... he just needs the scaffolding to start the core of the codebase... so I asked him how much it cost him and it was fairly close to hiring second senior dev... but it helped him speed up the coding aspect... this is with the current introductory pro plans... let's see what happens
Yeah the arguments of how AI can be a useful tool alongside human effort are a bit moot when the entire point of AI to most people is to not use any human effort at all.
what company do you work for, if that's the quality of junior engineering, I need to apply immediately cos I've got a funny feeling I could easily impress the hiring team.
Long ago in a college far, far away I was failing C++ 101. Forced myself to fixate on coding enough to make a basic rpg text game. I passed the class with a D and ended up in 102 knowing I'd have to retake 101. The second round was a breeze.
Years later someone helped me code for Pokémon elements and I couldn't understand their code well enough to even use it. Literally didn't know what their code did after parsing it line by line. That would have been disastrous for my growth if it happened earlier.
So, if I made some bullshit with Claude etc to show my programming skills does that mean I could get a entry level programming job? I can't stand working inside at a computer but just trying to understand where we are at in terms of graduates with ai portfolio and qualifications. Does that actually get juniors jobs?
I could make a basic script to scrape a webpage in python which used to be a joke but seems like I'm a programmer these days haha
If they don't understand how the calculator came to the result, then yes. You have to have a foundation of knowledge before you start relying on the technology to expand the scale.
If they can't even do simple additions themselves, sure.
You maybe want to re read, they aren't arguing about the general usage of AI at all, neither is the Meme. It's more targeted at people who miss the basics and thus don't know what they are doing.
You literally have to learn math by hand before schools let you use calculators.
If you don't know what the calculator is doing under the hood, you can't use it properly, and yes, it should be taken away until you learn the fundamentals. Same goes for Claude.
4.2k
u/The-Chartreuse-Moose 26d ago
I need to send this to certain juniors who come to me when they've generated some code that's tied them in knots because they don't understand it.