[nottorp]

> In our internal statistics and analytics on AI assisted programming it’s a very bad option for “junior” programmers. Basically it reduces productivity by quite a lot, it also produces a lot more pull request rejections due to really bad code. On the flip-side, things like co-pilot makes experts in their field of programming sooooo much more efficient.

There's been a study already. "AI" assisted beginners learned ... about nothing compared to the control beginners group. I think it was linked here on HN.

A LLM might help if it does not give you code but only answers short questions. Unless it's as good as those support chatbots.

[devjab]

I must not have expressed myself clear enough, sorry English isn’t my first language. What I meant was actually the opppsite or what you say. AI is fancy auto-complete for programmers who know when to ignore it. It’s terrible at answering questions. It will tell you the most amazing things about how computers work. I know it’s not that different from Google programming, probably even more accurate, but the key difference we’ve found is that people tend to trust the AI more than what they find on Google.

[sayonidroy]

we totally agree that AI giving you coding solutions doesn't help. So Edmigo never provides solutions unless explicitly requested. Instead it gives hints to help learners think

[nottorp]

It would get banned from StackOverflow then :)