Prompts are not code: if you understand none of the generated code, every argument about the program is a sophisticated version of “I told it to make no mistakes”.
0 Boosts
0 Likes
They're even slopping the requirements in one (large customer 😧) project I've until recently been assigned to.
And bragging about it.
So much for "this will help us concentrate on the big picture".
Gain in measured velocity, by the way, AFAICT: zero.
(At this point, I'm more flabbergasted than complaining! Such widespread complying-in-advance wasn't on my crystal ball.)
@quincy we did an experiment with letting someone slop an issue. We first estimated the time we’d need when doing it ourselves. To be fair we used the upper limit.
The expectation was that it would go faster.
It was slower.
EDIT: and horrifyingly that did not lead to people saying “we tried, it failed, let’s not do that anymore”.
(and same here about the complying ☹)
@ArneBab I wonder when this will start to register ... the delusion might be widespread, but could they please look at those darned KPI for *once*!
@quincy I think it’s because people always find a way to justify continued usage. It’s last month’ tech (that argument didn’t change for the past two years), it’s prompted wrong, the code isn’t clean enough, …
And only the arguments for continued usage get that leeway.
Did you see my quick re-evaluation of the experiment by metr? They claimed that they must have missed part of the speed gains, but did not take into account that repeat participants may have gotten worse:
https://rollenspiel.social/@ArneBab/117520574197499133
Gambling, sunken costs (also commitment to the issue - the worst pushers of this have staked their whole professional personas and more on this!)
So it's always something else at fault ...
@quincy How can we help people get out of that again after they are invested deeply?
I don't know. As long as the supply is there, there's little chance because of the manipulative nature of the game and of the technology itself, that the pushers will listen to detractors.
Maybe it has to burn itself out?
What really angers me (and makes me anxious, I'm not afraid to admit, even though pushers use it as a taunt!) is the extent to which it's gotten hegemonial.
1/2
I think it does help to inspire confidence in those who don't actually enjoy this "future" but feel too alone to speak out.
To unite, in the near future, and create a counterweight.
2/2
@ArneBab
My (soon to be be ex-, unless the bubble bursts this week *and* the machine idols go 404) coworkers no longer understand this.
They've fallen in lockstep behind that Claude thing.
The pipeline from "I'm just letting it make changes" to "we no longer want to understand the code or the process" was quick.
(This is why I'm so against even assigning this tech even the smallest role in a project. It's poison.)