top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 2 points 5 days ago

Humans are obsolete dead meats

  • source
  • [–] 4 points 6 days ago

    The sad reality is that most apps are regurgitated CRUD with new design language. The llms are really good are regurgitating this stuff, so the only interesting part left is the 10% that was already interesting before. I just take 2h lunches and spend time with my family while the llms puke out the CRUD, then thoughtfully work through the 10%

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 6 days ago

    12 hour shifts?

  • source
  • [–] 137 points 1 week ago (20 children)

    Reminder here that the culprit is capitalism, not LLMs.

    Voxium said he wouldn't mind the situation if workers were given more time to check the code.

    "Everyone, literally everyone, from an L1 to an L7 engineer here is doing the same thing. Talk to Claude," he added. "There is no sense of victory. Nobody is resolving bugs. In reality, nobody is thinking anymore."

    Some people might look at this and wonder what the problem is – who wouldn't want to be paid to do very little? But most people struggle when their work has no meaning. Voxium told Business Insider that if engineers lose the opportunity to understand the code and solve difficult problems, "there is nothing left ... Not even our soul. There will be no purpose."

    He added that the real problem is corporate leaders' obsession with pushing out more features. He said management often judges success by sprint cycles, pull requests, and the sheer number of features shipped, even when those additions do little to improve the product for users.

  • source
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 25 points 1 week ago (13 children)
  • [–] 65 points 1 week ago (11 children)

    People are clever; we invent things.

    LLMs are just a tool. Tools can be used by people; the problem is when people are used by tools, which is what is happening in this case.

    See Corey Doctorow's latest tour of YouTube promoting his idea of reverse centaurs (which, for the life of me, I can´t figure out why he didn´t call minotaurs).

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 13 points 1 week ago (1 child)
  • [–] 26 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

    Sure. You can talk about the LLM gestalt, if you'd like, that's worth examining, as with any other tool; especially stuff like progressive brain rot.

    But listening to the complaints people have about LLMs, it's mostly that it's being improperly used to replace human labor. Improperly in the sense that it can't actually do the job it is replacing humans in, which is a separate discussion of what kind of world it will be when there are no jobs for humans to do.

    LLMs are used responsibly by people doing their own work. For instance, Linus Torvalds used Claude to find errors in the Linux kernel (I think), that he then fixed himself.

    The problem is that capitalism, especially oligoplic capitalism, will create worse products at lower prices (or higher profits), and it will do so on the shortest timeline, ignoring things like future lawsuits over security flaws and future lack of programming talent and erosion of consumer trust.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 8 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    I guess calling them reverse centaurs visualizes the change that is happening in the relationship between human and machine. We used to be the head but we're the butt now. It makes you reconstruct the image in your head.

    In truth there already was a downward trend before LLM's exploded where tools were continuously used against people. "Enshitification" most people call it but it's really just free range capitalism. Generations of economy majors have been doing exactly what they were taught. Increase short term shareholder value at any cost. It's unsustainable and LLM's are just another accelerant.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 74 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    People are working 12 to 13 hours a day

    yeah I'd write a diatribe about the best work in the world under those circumstances too

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 64 points 1 week ago (12 children)

    I don’t hate Claude Code or whatever. I hate the company pushing you to constantly churn out shit so you need to turn to these tools to keep up pace or get fired.

    Architecture decisions or code quality? Fuck it just ship.

    You have concerns about an approach? You’re the enemy to your coworker’s promotion. Get out of the way.

    It’s all just so depressing. It will all come crumbling down. It’s a matter of when not if. But god I hate this ride right now.

  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 week ago (10 children)

    Time to lean into the slop extra hard. Use AI to create massive PRs, use AI to approve the PRs. Automate sending slack alerts when a feature ships. Be loud, really show some massive "Productivity".

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 20 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    A guy I don't really like at work does all sorts of AI induced PRs. I think he thinks it makes him look good. It probably does, to management.

    I got reprimanded for asking if a guy's extremely weird code was something he wrote himself. He went crying to my boss about how I'm mean on PRs. Fuck you, William. I hope your house catches fire and you pass out while asking Claude for help.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 55 points 1 week ago (14 children)

    I've heard the same from developers at work "doing this using AI makes it boring, but at the same time I feel silly if I write everything from scratch".

  • source
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 24 points 1 week ago (11 children)

    I'm not a developer but I do make little tools for myself at work. I used an LLM to assist with adding some features recently, nothing I couldn't easily do myself. It did a fine job and made minimal changes, all totally readable and for the most part the same way I would have done it.

    I have a new tool I want to make, and it's hard not to just turn to the LLM, since it'll save me many hours on a script that nobody else will ever see. It's really taken the fun out of it. I'm proud of what I made, even though nobody else will care, but doing this my usual way will feel like I'm using the wrong tool out of perversity.

    I dunno. I hate everything.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 week ago* (last edited 6 days ago)

    Creating something while not using the most efficient way possible has always been something that created the most unique, personal and opinionated results, because working on the task transforms both you and the product you are aiming for. These "inefficient" workflows also create the most useful and popular things, btw.

    You are not "using the wrong tool". You are doing it for yourself, for your mental wellbeing, for a sense of purpose. Whatever the LLM spits out is not YOUR code, it is SOME code. You should really reframe this for your own good.

    Late Edit: I wanted you to know i use local LLMs for my own purposes, mostly to create python scripts to automate processes. I would never claim any of the LLM output as my own creation, because it simply isn't. It's a tool to help with tasks that you could solve on your own, but aren't motivated enough to do - it has nothing to do with whatever creative output you have for yourself.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (8 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 42 points 1 week ago (6 children)

    workers spend 12-hour days pressing enter

    If only that could be automated somehow.

  • source
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 69 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    I feel like you are being sarcastic, but this actually is a solved problem :

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 21 points 1 week ago (4 children)

    An elegant solution. I wonder if it is more efficient than a 1TW data centre.

    Seriously, though, we use AI in the worst way possible. I like writing code, I hate checking someone else's code. Why aren't AIs doing the checking and engineers doing the coding?

    Forget "human in the loop" - let's shoot for "reviewed by AI". Deep down, we know the humans are barely paying attention when they check Claude's homework.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago

    I can attest this does work well. Having LLMs review your plans for how to do something and point out what you missed works well too. I also have my local LLM review creative writing without writing anything, give feedback about my Blender renders and other artistic things, and be a sounding board for ideas in general. Be warned that Qwen has no mercy and will shit all over your passion projects.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
  • [–] 32 points 1 week ago (1 child)

    My company made my job soul-sucking to the point I was doing the bare minimum a long time ago. They didn’t even need AI for that. Just some really shitty managers.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 30 points 1 week ago (3 children)

    The engineer added that employees are now pressured to ship products as fast as possible, leaving them with little time to review Claude's output or understand the code being created.

    Companies have always pressured software teams to ship products as fast as possible.

    What's new is the part where all of the worst coders can shit out code a lot faster and pretend like they're doing a good job. It used to take them a while to write garbage that they didn't understand or review themselves, but now they can do it so quickly that it makes the actual good coders look like they're taking a long time.

    This is why you absolutely have to have documented coding and review standards. The idea that you'd ship any code that has never been reviewed by a human is horrifying.

    The idea that you'd work 12 hour days is so stupid to start with. I've seen people consistently work that long and... surprise, they don't actually work that long. They work about the same as anybody else and goof off the rest of the time. I doubt you can even just press enter for that long. People just don't work that way.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago

    This is exactly it. I’ve worked with 2 different teams in this new era. One has all strong engineers and good review and testing standards. The other has 20% bad engineers that should have been fired years ago and’s weaker testing culture. The result is the strong team is delivering higher quantity software faster than ever, and the other team is going fast with much worse results. The quality is very bad, and the good engineers still there are quitting.

    The good engineers spend their whole days just trying to keep the ship afloat and minimizing the harm from the bad engineers. They hate it and are burning out fast.

  • source
  • parent
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 28 points 1 week ago (17 children)

    AI code assistants currently are like that senior dev who knows everything, has experience in everything, and always likes to help everyone. But sadly he does a lot of shrooms in his spare time and sees things that aren't there. He also has quite the opinionated ideas about what good code should look like.

    That implies that you just can't let him do the quality assurance. He can write code. You can ask him stuff. And he excels at debugging.
    But you can't let him plan the architecture. You can ask him about his ideas and select the ones that are actually good, though.
    And you definitely can't let him review his own code. Someone else has to do that.

    So if they literally just let the AI do everything, there is absolutely no way anyone has a chance to ever review the result because AI code is harder to review (for now), and AI loves to repeat itself (for now).
    And sure, they can tell it to write tests. But AI is dogshit at writing tests. It tends to forget the important cases, test the wrong thing, and/or obsess about completely irrelevant implementation details.
    I also tried the multi-round approach with a committee of agents trying to iteratively find and fix flaws. It only works well for finding bugs, not fixing them (for now).

    But while AI can't replace me, it is really nice to have as a tool - just like I have syntax highlighting in the IDE, I have a code assistant that can autocomplete a few lines of code, find out why my code misbehaves, or tell me what some library method is supposed to do. Sure, I have to still verify the results. But often, finding the bug or information was the hard part.
    Coding assistants are great. Just don't let them write too much code at once. You need someone who still actually understands the codebase. That sadly can't be an AI (yet).

  • source
  • hideshow 17 child comments
  • [–] 22 points 1 week ago* (14 children)

    I really love when I ask the AI to do something, and it gives me 40-50 lines to do it, and I tell it there's no way something like that should take that much code, and it's like oh, ya you're right, here's a 5 line version using something from from the standard sdk.

    I've tried to put in its memory to not do things like that, but it keeps doing it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 14 child comments
  • [–] 9 points 1 week ago (5 children)

    Even without external libraries, it routinely comes up with solutions that are at least 3-4x the complexity and LOC than how I would implement it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (6 replies)
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 27 points 1 week ago (9 children)

    If I'm forced into Claude Code or something similar, I will be looking for a new job. Ideally a different role in my company to keep my benefits and not have to completely start over, but if I have to jump ship, I will. Fortunately, our security and GRC teams have explicitly blocked Claude Code for the time being. I still have the tools built into Visual Studio, but I seldomly use them, and when I do it's basically as stack overflow, and that only when I can't find what I'm looking for through web searches first.

    We had someone from our Networking team come over the other day and say that he could tell our summer interns were gone because our AI usage dropped by over $1000 / month.

  • source
  • hideshow 9 child comments
  • load more comments (9 replies)
    [–] 19 points 1 week ago (3 children)
    load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 14 points 1 week ago

    Fucking snow flake anti ai nerds, like you weren't just pressing keys all day anyway, who cares if now it's just one key??

    /s

  • source
  • [–] 12 points 1 week ago (1 child)
    [–] 11 points 1 week ago
    [–] 10 points 1 week ago

    Oh it's way worser than that. Its erasing our skill

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next ›