As a professional software dev, AI is absolutely useful. But forcing people to use it is weird. And I never want to have to deal with a PM using AI to generate a PR and then having to review it. That’s absolutely not how you use AI, and more often or not that will be more work than just doing the whole thing yourself.
It’s critical to understand everything the AI is doing as it does it. Because, as the article said, if you don’t, you’re going to get subtle bugs that will be even more difficult to find later. And some of those bugs can be devastating. Add a number of those together and you have an unmaintainable mess.
don’t remember the syntax of the language they’re using due to their overreliance on Cursor.
I think this is pretty fine. Knowing what the situation calls for, knowing exactly how to accomplish it, and having the AI fill in the syntax for your psuedocode typically works pretty great. Something like “In the header add jQuery from the most common CDN. (Verify that CDN or this is a great vector for AI-induced malware/compromise.) Use an ajax call to this api [insert api url] and populate the div with id ‘mydata’.” That’s a pretty simple thing that it’ll likely handle pretty well and is easy to review.
The ways they’re forcing people to use it is kind of insane. But they’re doing that because they’re using AI as a justification for firing people. It doesn’t really work like that. Used properly will it speed up development? For most developers (anyone who used Stack Overflow), yeah. But that doesn’t mean a developer who’s juggling and maintaining 3 products can now suddenly handle 5. It doesn’t speed up context switching, really. And it’s not like it’s replacing the overhead of story boards, standups, change review boards, debugging, handling tickets, or other overhead. You might just spend 7 weeks developing a project instead of 8. And it can remove a bit of tedium (or add if you’re stupid about how you force AI).
It’s a useful tool. It shouldn’t be replacing a large number of developers. Of course they’ll fire the devs anyway, because like any other R&D the dividends are usually paid in the future. So in most cases, firing developers takes some time before you pay the toll, whether it’s opportunity cost, creating an unmaintainable mess, or losing the ability to maintain the things you already have. I expect that’s why the internet’s been falling apart lately. Fire a bunch of people and things they used to handle start to fall apart (or the people who have always handled those things get stretched too thin).
Pretty good and well balanced article.
As a professional software dev, AI is absolutely useful. But forcing people to use it is weird. And I never want to have to deal with a PM using AI to generate a PR and then having to review it. That’s absolutely not how you use AI, and more often or not that will be more work than just doing the whole thing yourself.
It’s critical to understand everything the AI is doing as it does it. Because, as the article said, if you don’t, you’re going to get subtle bugs that will be even more difficult to find later. And some of those bugs can be devastating. Add a number of those together and you have an unmaintainable mess.
I think this is pretty fine. Knowing what the situation calls for, knowing exactly how to accomplish it, and having the AI fill in the syntax for your psuedocode typically works pretty great. Something like “In the header add jQuery from the most common CDN. (Verify that CDN or this is a great vector for AI-induced malware/compromise.) Use an ajax call to this api [insert api url] and populate the div with id ‘mydata’.” That’s a pretty simple thing that it’ll likely handle pretty well and is easy to review.
The ways they’re forcing people to use it is kind of insane. But they’re doing that because they’re using AI as a justification for firing people. It doesn’t really work like that. Used properly will it speed up development? For most developers (anyone who used Stack Overflow), yeah. But that doesn’t mean a developer who’s juggling and maintaining 3 products can now suddenly handle 5. It doesn’t speed up context switching, really. And it’s not like it’s replacing the overhead of story boards, standups, change review boards, debugging, handling tickets, or other overhead. You might just spend 7 weeks developing a project instead of 8. And it can remove a bit of tedium (or add if you’re stupid about how you force AI).
It’s a useful tool. It shouldn’t be replacing a large number of developers. Of course they’ll fire the devs anyway, because like any other R&D the dividends are usually paid in the future. So in most cases, firing developers takes some time before you pay the toll, whether it’s opportunity cost, creating an unmaintainable mess, or losing the ability to maintain the things you already have. I expect that’s why the internet’s been falling apart lately. Fire a bunch of people and things they used to handle start to fall apart (or the people who have always handled those things get stretched too thin).
I’m sure it is.
It’s been interesting to see people not really getting angry about it, yet.