|
|
|
|
|
by motorest
547 days ago
|
|
> This is the fundamental truth that those pushing AI as a replacement for programmers miss (intentionally or not). I think this blend of comment shows a good dose of ignorance discussing the role of AI as a replacement for programmers. It's not like PMs are suddenly seeing engineers vanish from software projects. It's that AI makes developers so much more productive that you only need a subset of them to meet your work requirements. To give you an example, AI tools can indeed help you write whole modules. Yes, code can be buggy. Yet, the "typing" part is not what developers benefit from AI. Developers can iterate way faster on designs and implementations by prompting LLMs to generate new components based on new rewuirements, which saves you the job of refactoring any code. LLMs can instantly review changes and suggest ways to improve it, which would require either reading up on the topic or asking a fellow engineer on payroll to spend their time doing the same job. LLMs can explain entire codebases to you without asking a single question to veteran engineers in the team. LLMs can even write all your unit tests and rewrite them again and again as you see fit. LLMs can even recommend best practices, explain tradeoffs of approaches, and suggest suitable names for methods/variables based on specific criterias. This means AI can do a multitude of jobs that previously you needed a whole team to do, and for that you no longer need whole teams to do a job. |
|
If we train ourselves out of being able to do these tasks, won't we find it harder to recognise when the AI makes mistakes?