18 points | by bgrainger6 hours ago
I feel this is a very weak argument against AI. Professional software development rarely values crafting good code. You get it in to meet a deadline to make management that is technologically clueless happy. Even orgs that value good code have people leave because of the take a new job merry-go-round to get a good pay raise of years past. One of the reasons open source surpasses most closed source software despite a lack of funding is you a variety of individuals with different goals that are focused on making a maintainable and usable solution.
While this is very common, you also have professional software developers with a deep sense of ownership about a system: they animated it, so when it’s being quirky in particular ways, you have an almost supernatural sense of what branches it’s following. You don’t really get to internalise the logic of a program by reading it. It’s a byproduct of having to come up with it. When a part of that thinking is outsourced, some logic internalisation is lost.
Do people think an earnings call is some kind of secret meeting where the marketing stops?
30 lines of class boilerplate
One explanatory comment for every statement
The revolution is here!
Coverage from NYT (11 points) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41989256
Coverage from Verge (7 points) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41989674
Coverage from CNBC (2 points) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41989727
Has there been any novel or interesting code written or is this code block completion that saved people keystrokes?
It could also be they're using AI to propose and do large-scale refactor code mods, but that would be a smart use-case for it.
When vim shows me where a matching paren/bracket goes, is that AI that put them there?
When we use code validators like lint or Purify, is that AI code review from the 1980s?
Does this AI actually improve their M&A somehow? Does it allow them to AI-write new software instead of buying it?
I don't get it.