I'm a software developer in Germany and work for a small company.
I've always liked the job, but I'm getting annoyed recently about the ideas for certain people.....
My boss (who has some level of dev experience) uses "vibe coding" (as far as I know, this means less human review and letting an LLM produce huge code changes in very short time) as a positive word like "We could probably vibe-code this feature easily".
Someone from management (also with some software development experience) makes internal workshops about how to use some self-built open-code thing with "memory" and advanced thinking strategies + planning + whatever that is connected to many MCP servers, a vector DB, has "skills", a higher token limit, etc. Surprisingly, the people visiting the workshops (also many developers, but not only) usually end up being convinced by it and that it improved their efficiency a lot and writing that they will use it and that it changed their perspective.
Our internal slack channels contain more and more AI-written posts, which makes me think: Thank you for throwing this wall of text on me and n other people. Now, n people need to extract the relevant information, so you are able to "save time" not writing the text yourself. Nice!!!
I see Microsoft announcing that 30% of code is written by AI which is advertisement in my opinion and an attempt to pressure companies to subscribe to OpenAI. Now, my company seems to not even target that, but target the 100%????
To be clear: I see some potential for AI in software development. Auto-completions, location a bug in a code base, writing prototypes, etc. "Copilot" is actually a good word, because it describes the person next to the pilot. I don't think, the technology is ready for what they are attempting (being the pilot). I saw the studies questioning how much the benefit of AI actually is.
For sure, one could say "You are just a developer fearing to lose their job / lose what they like to do" and maybe, that's partially true... AI has brought a lot of change. But I also don't want to deal with a code base that was mainly written by non-humans in case the non-humans fail to fix the problem......
My current strategy is "I use AI how and when ->I<- think that it's useful", but I'm not sure how much longer that will work..
Similar experiences here? What do you suggest? (And no, I'm currently not planning to leave. Not bad enough yet...).
We had a dev drop a combined total of 8,300 lines of readme files into the code base over a weekend. I want to nuke all of them, my boss suggests reviewing and updating them.
rookie numbers
I think my team is in the tens of thousands of AI generated "documentation".
They claim the AI can use it to code better in the project.
Bullshit. The AI can't load in a single one of these files without filling half the context.
I was recently instructed to have gander at it.
I warned that it seemed inconsistent with the actual code.
Was told I'm right and they brushed it off.
"We should update this to reflect reality"
They brushed it off and we moved on. The misleading doc is still there, waiting for its next victim.
That last line belongs in a horror novel
"I don't have time to read through that much bullshit."
Maybe phrase it a little more kindly, but that's what I'd try at the very least. "I have other priorities at the moment" could work too.
Can you promise to spend exactly as much time reviewing as it took to create?