• Treczoks@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    3 days ago

    That’s what I’m afraid of for the rest of the development department. They have adopted AI to the core, and barely accept that my part can’t be AI’d for a number of reasons. Once the LLM providers will have to actually charge costs+profits, they’ll lose their whole toolbox, and I doubt they understand what they did to their code base.

    • Scrappy@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      3 days ago

      This will easily be solved by the smaller models being capable of making smaller changes on an already AI-ified code base. Sadly AI is here to stay in some way or form and I’m more worried about the removal of satisfaction from my job than anything else. Also think of having to help a colleague which has an AI codebase you’d have to help debug

      • zarkanian@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        2 days ago

        Sadly AI is here to stay in some way or form

        Whenever somebody says something like this, there’s the implicit acceptance of the whole “AI is inevitable” trope (spoiler: it isn’t) and the unspoken assumption that AI will be used in the future the same way it’s used now. LLMs were around before the AI craze, and they’ll be around after it. Who knows what they’ll be used for?

      • Treczoks@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        3 days ago

        I hope I never have to debug the AI crap I’ve seen. My job requires serious thinking about what I do, way deeper than the usual application programming. If I make mistakes, it is not about some app closing, it starts at system crashes and might end with bricked or even burned hardware. Which in turn could become rather expensive. I have to be very disciplined and defensive in my programming, but i also have way better numbers in bugs/loc than others.