[bccdee]

Nail guns are great because they're instant and consistent. You point, you shoot, and you've unimpeachably bonded two bits of wood.

For non-trivial tasks, AI is neither of those. Anything you do with AI needs to be carefully reviewed to correct hallucinations and incorporate it into your mental model of the codebase. You point, you shoot, and that's just the first 10-20% of the effort you need to move past this piece of code. Some people like this tradeoff, and fair enough, but that's nothing like a nailgun.

For trivial tasks, AI is barely worth the effort of prompting. If I really hated typing `if err != nil { return nil, fmt.Errorf("doing x: %w", err) }` so much, I'd make it an editor snippet or macro.

[zer00eyz]

> Nail guns are great because they're instant and consistent. You point, you shoot, and you've unimpeachably bonded two bits of wood.

You missed it.

If I give a random person off the street a nail gun, circular saw and a stack of wood are they going to do a better job building something than a carpenter with a hammer and hand saw?

> Anything you do with AI needs to be carefully reviewed

Yes, and so does a JR engineer, so do your peers, so do you. Are you not doing code reviews?

[bccdee]

> If I give a random person off the street a nail gun, circular saw and a stack of wood

If this is meant to be an analogy for AI, it doesn't make sense. We've seen what happens when random people off the street try to vibe-code applications. They consistently get hacked.

> Yes, and so does a JR engineer

Any junior dev who consistently wrote code like an AI model and did not improve with feedback would get fired.

[kgwxd]

You are responsible for the AI code you check in. It's your reputation on the line. If people felt the need to assume that much responsibility for all code they review, they'd insist on writing it themselves instead.