[jf22]

The discussions about AI code always devolve into "derision" comments like this.

"You are a dumb vibe coder producing bad slop"

You don't know anything about the code, the project, the person, but feel justified to insult and demean.

[muzani]

Anyone driving slower than me is an idiot and anyone driving faster than me is a maniac

[joshstrange]

> 200k lines of code per week

Do you seriously think that someone can write/review/maintain that?

Either they are lying about the output or they _are_ creating slop, period.

Ridiculous comments like that should _not_ go unchallenged, I wouldn't want younger-me seeing that and thinking it was normal or a good idea.

[jf22]

Yes, I do.

You didn't challenge, you insulted.

You can ask how they ensure quality, what the review process is like, what QA is like, how do humans keep up with that pace of change, etc.

[BugheadTorpeda6]

In this case, it deserves an insult. The answer to all of those hypotheticals is "you don't, it's impossible". Please, go ahead and tell us how you ensure all of those things. I would very much like to hear what you have to say because it will be groundbreaking for the whole industry, clearly. You have found the golden goose.

[joshstrange]

>>> 200k lines of code per week

>> Do you seriously think that someone can write/review/maintain that?

> Yes, I do.

Then we have nothing more to discuss. If someone says "I can fly by flapping my arms" and I can absolutely say "That's absurd", I'm not going to respond with "What technique do you use? How can you do that?" because it's patently absurd. I'm not going to engage, I'm going to call out what is a lie or someone who has deluded themselves into thinking they are actually creating something of value.

[jf22]

Framing being productive with AI code gen as being similar to a physically impossible process is as bad faith as you can get.

[judahmeek]

No, claims made without supporting evidence are as bad faith as it gets.

Claims regarding productivity gains would require long-term studies involving multiple metrics to be credible.

Until those exist, the benefits of AI code gen are basically as credible as MAHA pseudoscience.

[jf22]

>claims made without supporting evidence are as bad faith as it gets.

People are sharing their experiences. Every comment on the internet doesn't have to have scientific rigor behind.

I just want to point out you've insulted, made absurd comparisons, and now raised to goalposts to an impossible level. The cope about AI is real.

[BugheadTorpeda6]

I'm reasonably certain that a lot of that sort of bullshit is literally just astroturfing by desperate AI companies. I know it happens but that doesnt mean there aren't people really going along with it.

[jf22]

I thought so too until I tried to learn AI tools.

I'm a mediocre dev but I'm at least 10x more productive with AI tooling.