Just did an interview, got the "We are AI first now"
Posted by paddockson@reddit | ExperiencedDevs | View on Reddit | 133 comments
I just did an interview with a business and im feeling so down when the guy said "So just so were clear the CEO has really gone head-first into AI, we generate lots of our code but we still need people ensuring its correct. Are you ok with this cause i mainly spend my day reviewing code." The entire interview after that, I was just not interested and just wanted to finish ASAP.
Is this the future? Are we just code reviewers now? Dont get me wrong, i find AI super useful for debugging, searching code bases and generating simple stuff but a fully generated code base just makes me want to lay down and die.
fixed@reddit
It's not cognitively sustainable, and it's not economically sustainable. AI isn't going away but the honeymoon period is soon is ending.
ithkuil@reddit
It's fashionable to drop it right now because Claude is expensive AF, but that's just a blip in the long run. Within a few years, (maybe three, five, or so) 50 to 100 times more efficient AI approaches currently in development will make it into deployment at scale. The model sizes will increase by ten times to human complexity level and it will be very obvious to everyone who is still in denial at that point that humans are just a bottleneck in software engineering.
paddockson@reddit (OP)
Where is the infra coming from to 10x these models? What you just said makes no sense whatsoever cause if they could 10x those models while remaining profitable Opus4.8 would be better than 4.6 ... but its not.
The sheer size of these models are showing signs of it collapsing because it cannot handle any of it
ithkuil@reddit
Which is a massive incentive to fast-track new paradigms out of the lab and to full scale in the next few years. See things like Mythic AI, or the recent wurtzite ferroelectric breakthrough from the University of Michigan researcher. There's a reason that guy jumped.
SnugglyCoderGuy@reddit
The AI is not getting more efficient. All improvements I'm aware of are achieved by using bigger and bigger models and throwing more silicon at it.
vegangirltwink@reddit
why do you think it's ending soon?
corny_horse@reddit
Personally, I thinka. lot of companies were relying on Copilot massively subsidizing usage. Just check out r/githubcopilot in the last 24h now that MS is charging just usage. People blowing through a month subscription in one prompt lol
fixed@reddit
Because it's not economically sustainable; look up how much it costs to build and maintain hyperscaler infrastructure - it's absolutely staggering and someone maxing out their $20, $100 or $200/month subscription not even remotely sustainable.
For those of us who have been in the industry a long time.... this is the Cloud (i.e. AWS) adoption playbook all over again. Get people hooked on a cheap to near-free product and once there's a level of lock-in, return pricing back to operating cost reality.
Additionally, as a technical manager - the cognitive burnout of AI-first development plain doesn't work long term. You're already seeing experienced people surrender their critical thinking abilities because this way of working isn't enjoyable beyond the initial sugar hit and it's causing massive burnout.
SnugglyCoderGuy@reddit
$$$$$$
tonygoold@reddit
I’m not the person you replied to but: Subscriptions being forced into usage based billing, price increases to said usage based billing, deferred or cancelled data centre construction, and planned IPOs (S-1 filings) are just some of the signs that the free lunch is ending. The major players are all losing massive amounts of cash to subsidize token costs and it looks like the investors are losing patience (except SoftBank, which has made some notoriously bad investments in recent years).
k1v1uq@reddit
Feeding humans and making new working class babies is still cheaper than building datacenters? I hope we dodged the bullet...
paddockson@reddit (OP)
I got a feeling its soon, becuase theres no more "in X months we will replace these people" marketing. Theres lots of news about data centres cancelled and AI CEO's saying its not moved as fast as there predictions said. Its almost like there forced to tell the truth now. But the biggest thing is people are asking what is ROI for dev tools and how is that measured?
PolyglotTV@reddit
I'll honestly be happy when the price of tokens makes spamming prompts too expensive and we course correct to more thought out, carefully crafted, and well reviewed prompts.
fixed@reddit
Yep, a price correction here I think will genuinely help AI and software development in general. I don't think we're going to look back fondly on current times and see it as temporary industry psychosis.
paddockson@reddit (OP)
Like i said, i find so much value in my workflow. But I see zero value in 100% generation, the cost of tokens for what may or may not be secure and right and then another AI maybe reviewing all that cannot be sustainable at all
MoreHuman_ThanHuman@reddit
there will always be jobs outside of software development.
PopularBroccoli@reddit
At least they told you this upfront. I have had it hidden from me until I turned up on the first day
anubus72@reddit
hidden, really? This is just the reality now. LLMs are good at generating code, even in existing code bases. Humans need to spend lots of time reviewing code.
chickadee_guy@reddit
I used 15% of my monthly token allotment yesterday on output from Opus that was complete hallucinated slop that didnt compile and had emojis in it. Nearly all the token burn was on the "context management" tools all the SKILL ISSUE folks try to push on people. Turns out those suck too!
Yodiddlyyo@reddit
Weird, half my company uses opus and codex daily, and it's been perfect for us. Never gotten emojis as output. Maybe just try using the model through claude code with no "context management". It's really not needed. If you can't get good output with opus, you're doing something wrong, try simplifying.
chickadee_guy@reddit
You may have missed the point where that trash output from a single prompt was nearly 1/5 of my monthly allotment, and it didnt even complete the task. Tools useless with that kind of cost structure
Yodiddlyyo@reddit
Now im honestly doubting that you even have ever used claude. There is no monthly alottment. There is a rolling 5 hour limit, and then weekly limits. So it is literally impossible to exhaust 1/5th of your weekly limit on a single prompt.
And even if you mispoke or are exaggerating, if you are truly using up all of your alottment with a single prompt, that is still a you issue. That means you are sending a massive amount of context. There's no reason to do that. Even on the cheapest plan, you should be able to write a fair bit of code within the 5 hour window. Don't use "context tools" or whatever you said before. Don't send claude a ton of info setting up. With AI tools, less is more.
chickadee_guy@reddit
You realize harnesses can call claude? Rookie
Yodiddlyyo@reddit
What does that have to do with the fact that you're complaining about using a huge amount of your limit in a single prompt? However that is happening, stop doing that. But I'm the rookie? Haha
chickadee_guy@reddit
If you think LLM output is passable and efficient you have a skill issue
SnugglyCoderGuy@reddit
They really aren't,and as time goes by I become more and more convinced that those who extol AI as a great writer of code are actually really bad at writing it themselves.
Yodiddlyyo@reddit
I disagree. The people who are good engineers are the ones that can utilize these tools the best. If you're bad at coding, you just trust the llm output, which is wrong. If youre good at coding, you know what the end result should look like, you can be specific when writing the prompt, and you're able to check if the output is correct, and fix where it isnt. Nobody can write code faster than an llm.
SnugglyCoderGuy@reddit
Speed is only one factor, quality is another. I have yet to see anything approximating quality from an LLM
Yodiddlyyo@reddit
That is a you issue. My whole team uses them. The point isn't writing a lot of code faster. The point is that I know what the output should look like, the tool writes it 10 times faster than I could. I then review it to make sure it's good, make any changes if necessary, and then make a PR that gets reviewed by multiple people. My company builds financial software that many giant financial institution uses, code review is really serious for us. The quality of the final PR that used AI is identical to any other PR that didn't use AI. Since a human is the one that reviews it and decides to push it, final quality is up to you. Its a tool, you tell it what to do.
paraleluniversejohn@reddit
„The death of the craft“
Electronic_Log1999@reddit
"Good"
PopularBroccoli@reddit
No
RoyDadgumWilliams@reddit
I wouldn’t call my day to day “just” code review, but I do spend a lot of time reading and iterating on AI-written code and almost no time writing code by hand. So yeah I think that’s what the near future looks like at least
EkoChamberKryptonite@reddit
Hard disagree but I'm going to be against the grain here. I think the near future is using AI as Google+/StackOverflow+. Code is a product of our thinking. Offloading the bulk of that to a 3rd party doesn't bode well for the industry.
PolyglotTV@reddit
If you tell the LLM what code you want to generate it and review it, it is still a product of your thinking. You are just getting your thoughts transcribed much faster than if you did it manually.
EkoChamberKryptonite@reddit
Let's agree to disagree. Fast does not always mean good and well. I'll leave it there.
PolyglotTV@reddit
I never implied it did. You are disagreeing with an argument that nobody is making.
EkoChamberKryptonite@reddit
The positioning of this as a rebuttal betrays your implication that this is somehow good. You cannot now try to retcon and misconstrue your intent.
stevenr12@reddit
Google Plus is a name I haven’t heard in a long time.
AbstractLogic@reddit
I know a guy who still thinks cloud infrastructure is bad and the entire industry is wrong. Hey, he might even be right! But he’s still worst off for it.
EkoChamberKryptonite@reddit
You're comparing Apples to Oranges. Cloud infrastructure is reductively an abstraction but not one that outsources the majority of your thinking and output to a separate entity. If anything, it created more things to think and iterate on from a first-party perspective. "AI" doesn't do that. I say what I say from the perspective of those who hire engineers and/or assess engineering "cost".
AbstractLogic@reddit
You say that now. But when cloud came out it was literally the same argument as AI today. “Don’t hire a team and roll your own infrastructure! Outsource the responsibility to us! We know how to buy the best, build the best, run the best infrastructure and we can do it cheaper than your team can.”
EkoChamberKryptonite@reddit
Yes but rolling and managing cloud infrastructure still requires expertise and hands-on know-how and that created jobs and career ladders. AI isn't doing this. People aren't interviewing engineers on how well they can prompt and so centering our jobs around that workflow is self-defeating.
3j141592653589793238@reddit
Code is a product of our thinking, but not all of it. There are plenty of boilerplate structures, loops, etc that you really don't need to implement manually these days as they are just following standard practice. AI can just do that for you, so your time is then better spent addressing more difficult problems at a higher-level.
EkoChamberKryptonite@reddit
Let's agree to disagree.
Ciff_@reddit
Yepp. This is where we are right now.
I am spending all my time on design, architecture, requirements, and review. Promoting agents in between to make the actual code changes.
I alter the generated code manually where it is faster, but 95% of code ops are codex.
SnugglyCoderGuy@reddit
The written code is the design. The written code is the architecture.
https://wiki.c2.com/?TheSourceCodeIsTheDesign
Ciff_@reddit
Yes.
xSaviorself@reddit
I have been explaining to people outside of software that my education is finally aligning with my job requirements and it's thanks to AI.
20ish years ago, all the professors in CS forced students to do the architecture diagrams, the C4s. all the requirements gathering and even putting together a RFP to get approval. For the last 16ish years, I've probably diagrammed and wrote up documents of that quality/focus maybe less than 10 times?
In just the past year that's basically all I do now. I don't write code unless I want something super specific, and even then I'll drive AI to do most of the heavy-lifting. Personally, it feels like software developers are going to eventually be pseudo product owners. One person can now do the work of three and that's not good for jobs in tech.
arbitrarycivilian@reddit
Near future? The future is now, old man!
RoyDadgumWilliams@reddit
Well yes, the near future including the present of course
SnugglyCoderGuy@reddit
Quiet Dewey, the adults are talking
busilyniftyjogging@reddit
At least they were honest about it upfront. But yeah, if you're just validating generated code all day without actually building anything, that's a different job than what you signed up for. Worth figuring out if that's a temporary phase while they figure things out or actually their long-term plan.
ExperiencedDevs-ModTeam@reddit
We limit AI posts to Saturday and Wednesday UTC time. Please re-post then. https://www.reddit.com/r/ExperiencedDevs/comments/1rfhdrg/moderation_changes/
FalseRegister@reddit
> Are you ok with this cause
He asked. You should've just said 'No' and end the interview. Neither of you is a match for each other.
crecentfresh@reddit
In this economy?
Cons1dy@reddit
Or say 'Yes' and then think about it. No reason to immediately shut the opportunity down immediately
defenistrat3d@reddit
Kinda. I mean you need to know what you're doing for the prompting. And then know how to resolve issues as you go and during review. You're still in control. You can still tell it what patterns to use, what architecture to use, stuff like that. But it's definitely different and faster paced where the dev doesn't spend time doing things like writing large enums as an example.
Our job has always been to learn and adapt. This one is just a whopper.
paddockson@reddit (OP)
I understand a tool that can write enums for us, unit tests, controller etc etc. This is stuff we have written thousands of times but I cant believe there are companies that use AI to generate 100% of the code and then just review it. That cannot be cost effective at all.
pork_cylinders@reddit
It might be copium on my part but I believe this cannot be cost effective in the long term and the whole industry has collectively lost its mind but will eventually see the light. AI is great at appearing to be coherent and competent but it’s just predictive text on steroids at the end of the day. It can’t think and that will ultimately lead to terrible software that doesn’t work properly.
tripsafe@reddit
That’s true now but will that be true in 10 years? 50 years?
-Knockabout@reddit
"Cars are so advanced now, surely flying cars are just around the corner!"
LLMs are a specific technology with strengths and weaknesses. They are not a magical everything machine. They are good at what they are meant to do, but it is impossible to remove constraints built into their very architecture, like their tendency to hallucinate/not have the sum total of accurate human knowledge for reference.
smartgenius1@reddit
Would you build a bridge with materials that might be strong enough in 10 years?
promotionpotion@reddit
LLMs are inherently unreliable, so their output will always require laborious human review
John_Lawn4@reddit
Anyone bringing up the autocomplete thing as some kind of gotcha isn't paying attention
ParticularBeyond9@reddit
How good is it at being predictive vs 1 year ago vs 2 years ago?
wyldstallionesquire@reddit
A key distinction I’ve found is to not review the full result of an agents implementation. But guide and review in a more iterative and step based approach. You have to fight Claude, even in plan mode, a little to make that happen. But it balances understanding as you go with still getting some genuine speed and help from AI.
In other words, make sure you have your own plan before asking Claude, spank it if it does too much, make sure you are working in digestible chunks (ie, review a series of self contained commits rather than a PR). It’s the best blend I’ve had of trying the make the best of it while killing my day just reading AI code.
ObeseBumblebee@reddit
It's been very successful at my company.
And you're not just letting the AI write the code. You're monitoring it in real time. Steering it down the right paths. Keeping it from doing dumb changes and reviewing everything it does in PR.
I didn't like the idea either until i realized it all happened in front of me in a way i could steer it.
It's a very efficient way of programming and not just vibe coding and letting the AI do what it wants.
It requires experience and knowledge to do right.
polypolip@reddit
Use AI to spit out the enums and the easily verifiable code. That way you reduce the mental load as well as keep the interesting part of the task for humans. That's how you use it as a tool rather than become a tool for AI.
A complete AI first pipeline is worse than trying to herd a bunch of juniors with ADHD.
AbstractLogic@reddit
I built a complete POs for my business using nothing but AI and I’ve never looked at the code once. And before you go crazy I have 30 years experience as a developer. I wouldn’t do that for my billion dollar companies software… but for my small business POS that saves us $250 a month, it’s well worth it and works plenty fine.
splatterdash@reddit
> Is this the future? Are we just code reviewers now?
I think it's going to be, at least until AI stops being subsidized. No one knows exactly when that happens.
The big LLM-hosting AI companies (Anthropic, OpenAI, etc). haven't made any profit from AI. Their focus now is to growth, i.e. to get as many customers as possible at the cost of immediate profit. No company can do this forever, so the situation is clearly temporary.
When the true costs are revealed, I am quite sure AI use will decrease and companies will look to reduce their AI usage again (and maybe to clean up the mess AI created).
PolyglotTV@reddit
Yes this is the direction we are heading, more or less.
Try to keep a level head about it and stay pragmatic. The invention of the calculator mostly eliminated the need for us to manually crunch numbers. That didn't mean there was no longer a need to understand or be able to do those calculations yourself.
AI helps you write code and research and plan faster. It doesn't change the fundamental nature of your responsibilities. You still have to figure out requirements, come up with a good design, and produce quality code. But you'll find that rather than manually typing that code out yourself you can more quickly just ask the AI to do it for you and review to make sure it did what you wanted to do.
On the other hand if the hiring manager starts making claims like they've got a team of "agents" automously generating and reviewing each other's code or whatever then yeah, id be extremely skeptical that they are just full of it.
ShaniquaQ@reddit
The costs are starting to alarm the businesses and they are going to have to start reconsidering
rco8786@reddit
It’s not the future. It’s the now.
sorrge@reddit
Tomorrow, the review will not be necessary either. Humans will not be able to find any flaws in the generated code.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
The trend is already reversing, it's just that the average company is a few months behind
ObeseBumblebee@reddit
It's not going to fully reverse. We're just going to be more aware of what is an AI task and what is a person task
Cons1dy@reddit
Tell that to my management
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Any proof of that other than feelings? These businesses are still burning billions of USD a month
throwaway_0x90@reddit
There's absolutely zero chance the tech industry just says "oops, nevermind" to AI. This isn't just a fad like fidget spinners or NFT digit art.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Well maybe not fully, but if it were to reverse a good 80% for example wouldnt that be a major revert anyway?
ObeseBumblebee@reddit
If you have to bet between two extremes, companies abandon AI all together and companies fully embrace AI for everything, the safest bet is somewhere in the middle.
You don't know the future of AI anymore than i do.
But people saying it's not ever worth the costs are just wrong. That's cope. They don't like the contents of Pandoras box and they think we can just shove it back in.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
I am not sure if this counts for grifts as well, but we will see. It might come to widespread adoption of open source models, although the quality and hardware might never be enough
paddockson@reddit (OP)
I agree, the tools are far too useful to no use ever again, but I think were see less on the 100% code generation route and more "figure out how to make devs faster when given requirements". I suspect in our future planning sessions were be building skill.md files so all the devs AI's will be atleast working somewhat the same way
teomees@reddit
Future? No. It’s already the current trend, unfortunately. I am also interviewing with some companies I applied for and most of them emphasised the mandated use of AI.
It’s like a dystopia. I naively hope this hype bubble will be bursted at some point, but I doubt it’s gonna happen in short term.
_itshabib@reddit
Not code reviewers, builders. I don't understand people's negativity for being able to ship like 10x more than before. Don't recommend being too focused on the craft. How ur made irrelevant pretty quick
haragoshi@reddit
Yes that’s normal now
Classroom_Expert@reddit
Ai first with last week’s hype
nickhow83@reddit
Last week’s hype is so behind the curve. There’s already another 10 models that are the best one yet!
Not sure if I should add /s
nitrinu@reddit
In my experience: add the /s.
CelebrationWitty3035@reddit
What happens when all the code reviewers reach retirement age?
dly5891@reddit
What company is this?
FastHotEmu@reddit
Oh man!!! It's going to be so profitable fixing all the mess AI is creating!! Can't wait 😃 Y2K is going to be peanuts compared to this - and we made bank fixing Y2K bugs! 🤑 🤑 🤑
jaunonymous@reddit
In the near term at least, yes.
I think there may be a future where it agents become more expensive and companies pull back from it.
There are also industries or corners of industries where AI just won't be trusted. My company has a product that has some accounting software. I believe we are less AI driven there. My friend in Healthcare tech also doesn't get AI tooling.
NecessaryPraline9112@reddit
I think the idea of hiring real coders to look after vibe coded projects will go away. It won't prove valuable.
I've inherited vibe code, and you can't really review it, much less tell how it will work in the larger project architecture, because there is no coherent larger project architecture.
I think people will realize once you go vibe, your entire workflow will have to be vibed. I am skeptical how much this will eat real programmers lunch.
Virtual-Ducks@reddit
In many scenarios, having AI generate the code than a human review is the fastest approach. AI is very good.
posiedon77@reddit
My company hires a bunch of junior engineers and very few senior engineers. I'm the senior and just reviewing AI slop all day. Haven't written a PR myself in quite some time now. Sometimes I don't even have time to do PR reviews that's the amount of PRs coming in.
block-bit@reddit
Use the PR review skill
oVtcovOgwUP0j5sMQx2F@reddit
do you want the paycheck or not
block-bit@reddit
Kerching! 💰
ObeseBumblebee@reddit
At a certain point, you just gotta put the fries in the bag.
m4gic_pants@reddit
give it sometime till shit hits the fan
lokidev@reddit
I am scared that it doesn't that the development is barely fast enough to catch up with all those bad decision which happened in the past few months. And the chance is higher then 0. I don't know how much higher, but it's not impossible.
Best course of action for now is to be prepared for all outcomes:
- slow fade out of the hype
- hype being backed by new developments
- hype being crushed by massive amounts of problems
In all scenarios the AI code is here to stay. It's just too attractive to have 60, 70 or 80% of the quality at 20,30 or 50% of the time and cost.
I hope there will be a market for the few customers who need 99% and that AI doesn't reach it soon.
m4gic_pants@reddit
Of course its not going anywhere and i wouldn't want to
as a SWE its an amazing tool that really helps scaffold ideas and speed up my productivty.
What I meant in my comment that a lot of these AI first is blindly trusting the AI and letting it make descisons that really shape the software and can do so in a bad way.
it takes away from the "art" of engineering software the correct way. It will just balance out because it wont just be reviewing code it will be a mix.
lokidev@reddit
That I can agree to. It would even be a start if most/all AI engineers would at least do the bare minimum:
- use pre-commit, prek for checks before each commit (lint, security, codequality, complexity)
- use testing (now 100% is cheap and even mutation testing is no longer super esoteric)
- Be the human in the loop - not after thounds of lines, but constantly.
Architecture linter (like import-linter/etc.) would be the cherry on top.
m4gic_pants@reddit
wow yes.
If they just worked the same way but zoomed in on each task instead of it being a package of features the outputs will be way better overall.
treat each thing as a module + all what u said
paddockson@reddit (OP)
I heard non of these AI companies are even profitable, there running infra on false promises that the use-case will justify the spend. I spoke to one of my seniors and his daughter works for a company that 100% generates the code and get AI to validate it! Thats mental!! They keep the devs to fix the issues but surely that cost them millions in token cost! I really hope the hype dies down and we can start using the tools for actual good usage
m4gic_pants@reddit
jesus people rather brute force than work the correct way. its all about just seeing instant results and that dopamine rush. I feel bad for those devs and just makes AI the enemy for them instead of the tool it should be..
NightSp4rk@reddit
Their entire bet is that if the entire world puts enough resources into AI it will reach a point where it becomes so good that it doesn't need reviewers and also becomes cheaper to run. If their prediction is wrong (which it most likely is), and companies run out of cash to fund these wild AI pursuits (which they most likely will), this whole thing will crash and burn, and we will be relevant again. 🤞
ShazaBongo@reddit
LGTM all the way down...
roger_ducky@reddit
100% generation can work if you considered the agent a really book smart but inexperienced intern and only gave it implementation tasks after designing and breaking down the tasks carefully.
Most 100% AI companies don’t do that, though, unfortunately.
thephotoman@reddit
Meanwhile, after yesterday’s pricing changes, I’m giving up on it. It now costs too much to be useful at adding efficiency or capacity. It couldn’t even manage to write a unit test without running out of tokens.
Playful_Pianist815@reddit
One of the fouders said to me - "Why is the estimate on this 1 week? Opus 4.8 just droped!"
entimaniac91@reddit
I'm a staff engineer and I'm in a group who is essentially internal solutions engineering/architecture for our company. We are the face of our internal platform and I'm in all sorts of meetings most of the day, jumping around all sorts of problems. We have developed a few AI-first projects that are really well documented, well organized, have agents files, have skills, etc.. I get to talk and take notes in a call, load up a project in codex, feed it what we need to do, and then let it run while I go to my next meeting. Then I test and review it when I have some spare time. After doing this flow for months, we have refined the instructions and automation to work pretty reliably well. We are rapidly protyping, building features, etc. I'm sure not every project is going to be well suited to this sort of workflow, but it does seem to be a big productivity boost in my situation.
stellar_opossum@reddit
I'm always confused when I hear something like because there are so many ways how this could work in practice. Just like there's a huge difference between a junior overseas contractor and a staff engineer "writing 100% of the code by hand", there's even bigger difference between how "writing 100% of the code with AI" can work out when done by different people in different development culture. You can definitely generate 95% of your code and still keep it maintainable and don't accumulate a lot of technical and cognitive debt.
That said, this announcement does imply the worse scenario. It seems that people that do it "right" tend to not emphasize the way they achieve their goals because it's not that important after all.
poponis@reddit
OK, I can tell you that when I was a project lead dev, I was only code reviewing. I dont mind. I dk mind if they tell me how to do the code review, how to let it go, and I do mind if the code I have to review is a mess. Also, ypu shouldn't sit during the whole interview. You could havw left, by saying you are not interested.
DeterminedQuokka@reddit
I mean literally everyone is saying they are ai first it means nothing.
And yes at many if not most companies no one actually hand rolls code. How involved they are varies by who they are, what they are doing, etc.
But the stated goal is definitely that you ask ai to do something then you review the final product. Ai just isn’t good enough for that yet.
Given all of that and the fact I could work at the company that said that to you. My job is not dramatically different. Writing the code was never the core part of my actual job it was always determining what code should be written.
Sufficient_Dig207@reddit
Why not using AI to review?
nickhow83@reddit
And also AI to babysit the PR and fix the AI review notes of the AI code. You’d think I’m joking here, but I’m not
Sufficient_Dig207@reddit
Completely agree with you. We just need to keep the ball rolling.
Your AI can make many comments on the PR. Now it's their turn to address it.
We will just have an endless AI conversation
GlobalCurry@reddit
I always ask if a company uses AI, mainly because I've encountered a few that still don't and I think working at those would be a set back in my career.
another_dudeman@reddit
The industry is not a monolith, People and companies are all different. AI is just another tool to use or abuse.
circalight@reddit
Ask them what their AI budget is and how they're measuring ROI.
arvigeus@reddit
We simply upgraded the Rubber Ducky's programming, so it now spits out the code for you as well.
TheWhiteKnight@reddit
It's already happening / has happened. There is currently zero reason to type out code and a lots of reasons to be very careful with reviewing code. Most medium and large companies are investing heavily in tokens and expect their developers to use them. AI is a huge force multipliers. And agentic SDLC workflows are being implemented.
But as others have said there are risks and companies will and are already learning some very tough lessons.
There's way too much management hype. I'm experiencing it right now in a company with hundreds of developers. The top brass is telling the whole company that our velocity is about to jump much higher than it actually can in the short and medium term.
It's a mixture of hype and reality, but manual coding is getting abstracted away for sure. The humans-in-the-middle are already spending far more time vibing with AI and reviewing its output.
Mozanatic@reddit
I really hope this is just a Trend that will go and eventually companies let the developers decide how they finish their work. I doubt AI is really making things that much faster. Sure the code get generated directly, but you spend much more time planing and reviewing. So to me it’s seems more like shifting work from one stage to another.
I sincerely believe just typing code was never really a bottleneck, but all the other things while coding (like understanding the problem and thinking through what the code really does and should do) My belief is that people just feel more productive than actually being productive, because some corners are cut, where there shouldn’t.
Code generation is to me the least interesting feature of AI. I would rather have AI speed up all the other things around the job, like documentation, testing, writing task and so on then having it write code. I sincerely believe direct engagement with the codebase is important for long term understanding and a sense of ownership for developers as well as happiness.
Developers that like what they do are more likely to come up with good ideas how to improve something.
punkpang@reddit
For now, we are. It takes a while for people who use hyped up tech to realize where it fails. Same happened with literally any technology humans invented and started using.
Unimaginable number of tech-illiterate people wrongly assumed they have superpowers because AI agrees with them and produces results that resemble production grade.
ObeseBumblebee@reddit
Yes for the foreseeable future this is exactly where much of the industry is
To me it's encouraging that the manager said they're looking for people who can read the code. Means they recognize the efficiency boost AI provides but don't fully trust the output and want to hire people who know what good output looks like.
That's how it should be.
I think you're going to find less and less shops that do things by hand.
I make sure to put that i have experience with and understand AI first workflows on my resume. Because it is what a lot of companies are looking for.
RoosterBurns@reddit
It's doomed, but even before it's doomed it's the worst imaginable ways to use an LLM to assist coding. Debugging and docs sure why not? But being OK with the huge amount of mediocre shit LLMs spew out seems worse than an ignorance of the risk every line of code brings to a company and just a complete death of any form of skill
wokeboogeyman@reddit
"We don't care about accuracy or quality here, and we're looking to hire people to take the blame when things don't work out like the CEO's unrealistic promises to investors"
NightSp4rk@reddit
It's a phase. Once brain rot settles in, we'll be back to writing proper clean code.
Right now, they're only seeing that feature-development speed is cranked up (in some cases), so they're all betting on AI. Once they realise it's not sustainable, and that they won't have qualified people to review code anymore at some point, this trend will die down, and AI will just be intellisense on steroids.
SnooWoofers4430@reddit
It will blow over. AI will still be used as a tool, nothing more. We already see how companies with AI first methodology are paying the price.
quizikal@reddit
Thats the way the software industry is going. It's possible to develop high quality software with AI but that means that Devs spend way more time planning and reviewing. Which sucks because generaly devs like to code