[bluefirebrand]

I think this really highlights the difference between "pro ai" and "anti ai" people

"It's full of noise but I'm confident I can cut through it to get to the good stuff" - Pro AI

"It's full of noise and it takes more effort to cut through than it would take to just build it myself" - Anti AI

I'm pretty Anti myself. I think "I can cut through the noise" is pretty misplaced overconfidence for a lot of devs

[diggan]

I don't think I would place myself on either sides, I guess I'm in the "AI is OK at some stuff" camp.

But if you're getting a lot of noise, I'd immediately try to adjust my system/user prompt to never get that noise in the first place. I'm currently using a variation of https://gist.github.com/victorb/1fe62fe7b80a64fc5b446f82d313... which is basically my personal coding guidelines but "codified" as simple rules for LLMs to understand.

For anything besides the dumb models, I get code that more or less looks exactly like how I would have written it myself. When I find I get code back that I'm not happy with, I adjust the system/user prompt further so this time and the next it returns code like how I would have done it.

[bluefirebrand]

I feel I should clarify

When it comes to judging the quality of AI output, I do agree with "AI is ok at some stuff"

When I say I tend to fall on the Anti AI side, I am saying "But I still don't think it's worth using much"

I don't really want to lean on tools that are just ok at some stuff.

[Viliam1234]

I basically only use AI for tasks that I could also do myself, because those are the tasks where I can find and fix bugs. When used like this, AI can save a lot of typing.

So I guess that puts me into "pro AI" camp, but it's not like we actually disagree.

[bluefirebrand]

That's fair

I don't really find that typing is my bottleneck mostly. AI saving me time spent typing code also just costs me time spent prompting and re-prompting the AI so... Kinda a wash mostly?