If AI is so good at coding - where are the open source contributions? : programming

[–] TempermentalAnomaly@lemmy.world 7 points 4 hours ago (1 children)

I am not a programmer and I think it's silly to think that AI will replace developers.

But I was working through a math problem in Moscow Puzzles with my kiddo.

We had solved it, but I wasn't sure he got it at a deep level. So I figured I'd do something in Excel or maybe just do cut outs. But I figured I'd try to find a web app that would do this better. Nothing really came up that was a good match. But then thought, let's see how bad AI programming can be. I'd fought with it over some excel functions and it's been mainly useful in pointing me in the right direction, but only occasionally getting me over the finish line.

After about 6 to 8 hours of work, a little debugging, havinf teach and quiz me occasionally, and some real frustration of pointing out that the feature previously changed and re-emeged, I eventually had something that worked.

The Shooting Range Simulator is a web-based application designed to help users solve a logic puzzle involving scoring points by placing blocks on vertical number lines.

A buddy developer friend of mine said: "I took a quick scroll through the code. Looks pretty clean, but I didn't dive in enough to really understand it. Definitely all that css BS would take me ages to do without AI."

I don't take credit for this and don't pretend that this was my work, but I know my kiddo is excited to try the tool. I hope he learns from it and we bond over a math problem.

I know that everyone is worried about this tool, but moments like those are not nothing. Personally, I'm a Luddite and think the new tools should be deployed by the people's livelihood it will effect and not the business owners.

[–] bignose@programming.dev 4 points 3 hours ago

Personally, I’m a Luddite and think the new tools should be deployed by the people’s livelihood it will effect and not the business owners.

Thank you for correctly describing what a Luddite wants and does not want.

[–] Reptorian@programming.dev 1 points 5 hours ago

I'll admit I did used AI for code before, but here's the thing. I already coded for years, and I usually try everything before last resort things. And I find that approach works well. I rarely needed to go to the AI route. I used it like for .11% of my coding work, and I verified it through stress testing.

[–] glitchdx@lemmy.world 8 points 9 hours ago

If AI was good at coding, my game would be done by now.

[+] sekxpistol@feddit.uk -8 points 11 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (4 children)

To be honest, all of this is cope.

It's true that ai isn't a replacement for good coders ..YET.

But it will be. You all can be as mad as you want, publish as many articles about how much ai sucks as you want. but it won't stop anything from happening.

I say this as someone who has just started to learn to code myself.

The reason you all are mad is because you suddenly feel unsafe and unappreciated. And you're right.

Ai is still gonna happen though. It will take away a lot of your jobs (especially starting with jr coders just getting into the market). It will lower your pay. You can yell about it, or you can adapt. Sucks, but it is what it is.

Think of it this way: what do you think the market is gonna be like in 5 years? Then 10? Brah, start preparing now. Right fucking now. Cuz it ain't gonna get easier for you. I promise.

It happened with blue-collar factory works in the midwest regions of the US because of automation and offshoring. People bitched and tried to stop it. Lots of snooty white-color workers yelled, "learn to code!" But none of that saved their jobs.

And you guys won't stop it happening with your jobs either. I don't like the idea of AI taking over everything either. But it will. Adapt or die.

I've just started to learn to code. I am enjoying it. But in no way, shape, or form am I thinking it's going to lead to a job for me.

EDIT: To copy what some else said, much better than me:

The idea that AI will some day be good at coding isn’t the issue. The issue is that some people in management think it’s already well on the way to being a good substitute, and they’re trying to do more with fewer coders to everyone’s detriment.

[–] Mniot@programming.dev 11 points 7 hours ago (2 children)

To be honest, you sound like you're only just starting to learn to code.

Will coding forever belong to humans? No. Is the current generative-AI technology going to replace coders? Also no.

The reaction you see is frustration because it's obvious to anyone with decent skill that AI isn't up to the challenge, but it's not obvious to people who don't have that skill and so we now spend a lot of time telling bosses "no, that's not actually correct".

Someone else referenced Microsoft's public work with Copilot. Here's Copilot making 13 PRs over 5 days and only 4 ever get merged you might think "30% success is pretty good!" But compare that with human-generated PRs and you can see that 30% fucking sucks. And that's not even looking inside the PR where the bot wastes everyone's time making tons of mistakes. It's just a terrible coworker and instead of getting fired they're getting an award for top performer.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 4 points 4 hours ago

It's the Dunning-Kruger effect.

And it's fostered by an massive amount of spam and astroturfing coming from "AI" companies, lying that LLMs are good at this or that. Sure, algorithms like neural networks can recognize patterns. Algorithms like backtracking can play chess or solve or transform algebraic equations. But these are not LLMs and LLMs will not and can not replace software engineering.

Sure, companies want to pay less for programming. But they don't pay for software developers to generate some gibberish in source code syntax, they need working code. And this is why software engineers and good programmers will not only remain scarce but will become even shorter in supply.

And companies that don't pay six-figure salaries to developers will find that experienced developers will flat out refuse to work on AI-generated codebases, because they are unmaintainable and lead to burnout and brain rot.

[–] sekxpistol@feddit.uk 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (2 children)

To be honest, you sound like you’re only just starting to learn to code.

I definitely am. But I have no doubts that ai is going to take a lot of entry-level type jobs soon, and eventually higher end jobs.

We'll always need good, smart coders. Just not as many as we have now.

but it’s not obvious to people who don’t have that skill and so we now spend a lot of time telling bosses “no, that’s not actually correct”.

I get it. But those clueless people are gonna be the people in charge of hiring, and they'll decide to hire less, and expect current staff to do more. I've seen in hundreds of time in industries, and it's already happening now in yours.

For context, I'm old. So I've seen your arguments in many different industries.

And to your point, they'll have ai replacing good people, long before ai is good enough to. But you're approaching the issue with logic. Corporate lacks a lot of logic.

I'm already seeing it in your industry. Plenty of reddit/Lemmy posts talking about how coders have been laid off, and having a much much more difficult time getting another job than at any point in their careers.

Again, I'm saying AI is a good solution. I'm saying management will think that. Just like they did when they offshored jobs to much less skilled, yet way more inexpensive workers.

To copy what someone else in this thread said:

The idea that AI will some day be good at coding isn’t the issue. The issue is that some people in management think it’s already well on the way to being a good substitute, and they’re trying to do more with fewer coders to everyone’s detriment.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 3 points 4 hours ago

If you walk around in my city and open your eyes, you will see that half of the bars and restaurants are closed because there is a shortage of even unskilled staff and restaurants didn't pay enough to people. They now work in other sectors.

And yes, software developers are leaving jobs with unreasonable demands and shitty work conditions. Last not least because conserving mental health is more important. Go, for exanple, to the news.ycombinators.com forum and just search for the keyword "burnout". That's becoming a massive problem for companies because rising complexity is not matched by adequate organizational practices.

And AI is not going to help with that - it is already massively increasing technical debt.

[–] Mniot@programming.dev 4 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I don't understand how you think this works.

If I say, "now we have robots that can build a car from scratch!" the automakers will be salivating. But if my robot actually cannot build a car, then I don't think it's going to cause mass layoffs.

Many of the big software companies are doing mass layoffs. It's not because AI has taken over the jobs. They always hired extra people as a form of anti-competitiveness. Now they're doing layoffs to drive salaries down. That sucks and tech workers would be smart to unionize (we won't). But I don't see any radical shift in the industry.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 1 points 41 minutes ago* (last edited 33 minutes ago)

A big part of the changed software job market in the US is caused by the rise of interest rates, and in consequence a large part of high-risk venture capital money drying up. This was finsncing a lot of start-ups without any solid product or business model. And, this began very clearly before the AI hype.

The trope that AI is actually replacing jobs is a lie that AI companies want you to believe.

[–] chaos@beehaw.org 4 points 8 hours ago (1 children)

Do you think there's any reason to believe that these tools are going to continue their breakneck progress? It seems like we've reached a point where throwing more GPUs and text at these things is not yielding more results, and they still don't have the problem solving skills to work out tasks outside of their training set. It's closer to a StackOverflow that magically has the answers to most questions you ask than a replacement for proper software engineering. I know you never know if a breakthrough is around the corner, but it feels like we've hit a plateau for the foreseeable future.

[–] sekxpistol@feddit.uk 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago)

Do you think there’s any reason to believe that these tools are going to continue their breakneck progress?

I do.

And as I mentioned in another comment, it's not so much that I think AI will do a better job, it's that I think MANAGEMENT will think AI does a cheaper job. Already many tech people who have been laid off are saying it's the worst job market they've ever seen.

AI sucks. But management is about dollars NOW. The are shortsided, fall into fads, and they will see the cost savings now as outweight the long term problems. I don't agree with them, I am saying they will do that tho. Even if we don't agree.

To copy what someone else in this thread said:

The idea that AI will some day be good at coding isn’t the issue. The issue is that some people in management think it’s already well on the way to being a good substitute, and they’re trying to do more with fewer coders to everyone’s detriment.

[–] bpev@lemmy.world 6 points 9 hours ago (2 children)

I think the biggest difference between this and blue-collars workers losing their jobs, though, is that the same people losing their jobs are also placed very to benefit from the technology. Blue collared workers losing manufacturing jobs couldn't, because they were priced out of obtaining that mafacturing hardware themselves, but programmers can use AI on an individual basis to augment their production. Not sure what the industry will look like in 10 years, but I feel like there will be plenty of opportunities for people who build digital things.

That being said, people who were looking to be junior developers exactly right now.... uhhh.... that's some extrememly unlucky timing. I wish you luck.

[–] kossa@feddit.org 2 points 3 hours ago (1 children)

They could now, because big "AI" companies sell their product on a loss.

The individual programmer is already outpriced when it comes to training those kind of models themselves. Once the companies want to turn a profit, the just laid off worker is outpriced as well. If an LLM can really do as good as a human programmer, who costs 70-100k, nothing stops the LLM provider to charge 35-50k easily. Try to augment your productivity at that price point, especially without a job.

I mean, society came through the change of the first and second work sector, we could reap the new productivity gains for the benefit of all, but, alas here we are at the beginning of a new crisis 😅

[–] bpev@lemmy.world 1 points 16 minutes ago

mmm I mean I haven't been able to use them, since I'm on a laptop, but my understanding is that local models like devstral and llama are relatively competitive, and those can be used on like... a gaming rig? I don't think they'd be able to push the price that much.

But I don't disagree that big companies will try their darnedest to.

[–] sekxpistol@feddit.uk 0 points 6 hours ago* (last edited 6 hours ago) (1 children)

Well I'm old, so no looking for a job, I am just learning programming because i want to. But to your point, I am seeing LOTS of developers who have been laid off and finding another job is proving more challenging than ever before. It's rough out there and I feel for them.

To copy what someone else in this thread said:

The idea that AI will some day be good at coding isn’t the issue. The issue is that some people in management think it’s already well on the way to being a good substitute, and they’re trying to do more with fewer coders to everyone’s detriment.

[–] bpev@lemmy.world 1 points 2 minutes ago

Oh layoffs are definitely happening. I'm just not sure if it's caused by AI productivity gains, or if it's just the latest excuse (the pandemic, then soft layoffs of "back to office" enforcement, and now AI). Esp since the companies most talking about AI productivity gains are the same companies that benefit from AI adoption...

What I wanted to explain is just that the skills to program actually translate pretty well. At my old company, we used to say "you know someone's a staff engineer, because they only make PowerPoint presentations and diagrams, and don't actually write any code". And those skills directly translate to directing an AI to build the thing you need. The abstract Ed architect role will probably increase in value, as the typist decreases.

My biggest concern is probably that AI is currently eating junior dev jobs, since it can fill the role of what juniors have typically done in the past. But I feel like that might just be a transition thing; many developers these days don't know low-level code. The abstraction might just move up another level, and people will build more things. At least, this is the optimistic view. 🤷 But I'm an optimistic guy.

[–] Abnorc@lemm.ee 9 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

The idea that AI will some day be good at coding isn't the issue. The issue is that some people in management think it's already well on the way to being a good substitute, and they're trying to do more with fewer coders to everyone's detriment.

[–] sekxpistol@feddit.uk 0 points 6 hours ago

100 percent. YOu said in two sentences what I have been trying to say to others. I think you are 100 percent correct. Management will count on AI long before they actually should. That shortsightedness has always been around and always will be.

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 19 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Can Open Source defend against copyright claims for AI contributions?

If I submit code to ReactOS that was trained on leaked Microsoft Windows code, what are the legal implications?

[–] proton_lynx@lemmy.world 16 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

what are the legal implications?

It would be so fucking nice if we could use AI to bypass copyright claims.

[–] notannpc@lemmy.world 15 points 1 day ago (1 children)

AI is at its most useful in the early stages of a project. Imagine coming to the fucking ssh project with AI slop thinking it has anything of value to add 😂

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 26 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (2 children)

The early stages of a project is exactly where you should really think hard and long about what exactly you do want to achieve, what qualities you want the software to have, what are the detailed requirements, how you test them, and how the UI should look like. And from that, you derive the architecture.

AI is fucking useless at all of that.

In all complex planned activities, laying the right groundwork and foundations is essential for success. Software engineering is no different. You won't order a bricklayer apprentice to draw the plan for a new house.

And if your difficulty is in lacking detailed knowledge of a programming language, it might be - depending on the case ! - the best approach to write a first prototype in a language you know well, so that your head is free to think about the concerns listed in paragraph 1.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 5 points 23 hours ago (2 children)

the best approach to write a first prototype in a language you know well

Ok, writing a web browser in POSIX shell using yad now.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago

I'm going back to TurboBASIC.

[–] HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org 4 points 22 hours ago* (last edited 22 hours ago)

writing a web browser in POSIX shell

Not HTML but the much simpler Gemini protocol - well you could have a look at Bollux, a Gemini client written im shell, or at ereandel:

https://github.com/kr1sp1n/awesome-gemini?tab=readme-ov-file#terminal

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 2 points 19 hours ago* (last edited 19 hours ago) (2 children)

AI is only good for the stage when...

AI is only good in case you want to...

Can't think of anything. Edit: yes, I really tried
Playing the Devils' advocate was easier that being AI's advocate.

I might have said it to be good in case you are pitching a project and want to show some UI stuff maybe, without having to code anything.
But you know, there are actually specialised tools for that, which UI/UX designers used, to show my what I needed to implement.
And when I am pitching UI, I just use a pencil and paper and it is so much more efficient than anything AI, because I don't need to talk to something, to make a mockup, to be used to talk to someone else. I can just draw it in front of the other guy with 0 preparation, right as it came into my mind and don't need to pay for any data center usage. And if I need to go paperless, there is Whiteboards/Blackboards/Greenboards and Inkscape.

After having banged my head trying to explain code to a new developer, so that they can hopefully start making meaningful contributions, I don't want to be banging my head on something worse than a new developer, hoping that it will output something that is logically sound.

[–] ChickenLadyLovesLife@lemmy.world 7 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

AI is good for the early stages of a project ... when it's important to create the illusion of rapid progress so that management doesn't cancel the project while there's still time to do so.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 17 hours ago

Ahh, so an outsourced con~~man~~computer.

[–] Irelephant@lemm.ee 5 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Its good as a glorified autocomplete.

[–] ulterno@programming.dev 3 points 19 hours ago (1 children)

Except that an autocomplete, with simple, lightweight and appropriate heuristics can actually make your work much easier and will not make you have to read it again and again, before you can be confident about it.

[–] Irelephant@lemm.ee 6 points 18 hours ago

True, and it doesn't boil the oceans and poison people's air.

[–] oakey66@lemmy.world 35 points 1 day ago (2 children)

It’s not good because it has no context on what is correct or not. It’s constantly making up functions that don’t exist or attributing functions to packages that don’t exist. It’s often sloppy in its responses because the source code it parrots is some amalgamation of good coding and terrible coding. If you are using this for your production projects, you will likely not be knowledgeable when it breaks, it’ll likely have security flaws, and will likely have errors in it.

[–] Excrubulent@slrpnk.net 1 points 5 hours ago

And I'll keep saying this: you can't teach a neural network to understand context without creating a generalised context engine, another word for which is AGI.

Fidelity is impossible to automate.

[–] tisktisk@piefed.social 4 points 14 hours ago

So you're saying I've got a shot?

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 39 points 1 day ago (8 children)

Have you used AI to code? You don't say "hey, write this file" and then commit it as "AI Bot 123 aibot@company.com".

You start writing a method and get auto-completes that are sometimes helpful. Or you ask the bot to write out an algorithm. Or to copy something and modify it 30 times.

You're not exactly keeping track of everything the bots did.

[–] Reptorian@programming.dev 1 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

I used it only as last resort. I verify it before using it. I only had used it for like .11% of my project. I would not recommend AI.

[–] atzanteol@sh.itjust.works 0 points 25 minutes ago

My dude, I very code other humans write. Do you think I'm not verifying code written by AI?

I highly recommend using AI. It's much better than a Google search for most things.

[–] eager_eagle@lemmy.world 49 points 1 day ago (11 children)

yeah, that's... one of the points in the article

load more comments (11 replies)

load more comments (6 replies)

[–] Prime@lemmy.sdf.org 10 points 1 day ago (3 children)

Microsoft is doing this today. I can't link it because I'm on mobile. It is in dotnet. It is not going well :)

load more comments (3 replies)

Programming

Rules

Wormhole