5 ms·

Gee really? You mean generated code by some ML model means people get lazier and just cut/paste hallucinated code? Who would have thought?

gtirloni 3y ago
I doubt AI is making anyone lazier and less worried about code quality, if they weren't already.
- cjbgkagh 3y ago
  People can learn things even if they would rather not. Allowing them to take shortcuts will diminish their learning opportunities.
  - flir 3y ago
    I'm not ashamed to admit I'm learning a lot from the chatbots. And it seems to stick better, as compared to reading a manual.
    - gtirloni 3y ago
      Same here. Instead of me conforming my thoughts to some document, the chatbot works together with me and my questions. I find them very useful form learning, so much I usually start a learning session first before I ever try to search something on Google. Back to code solutions, I never ever use them if I don't understand ALL that is happening in that code. I know the bot will ignore many corner cases or that it doesn't know some subtle implications about the context where I'll deploy the code. I think someone that doesn't care about code quality was already copying and pasting code from StackOverflow and fisting the keyboard until it works then moving to the next ticket. I really don't think AI is making things worse in that regard.
- fhd2 3y ago
  Maybe lazy is the wrong term, but less attentive apparently. There was the Ironies of Automation paper about this: https://ckrybus.com/static/papers/Bainbridge_1983_Automatica.pdf https://ckrybus.com/static/papers/Bainbridge_1983_Automatica...
- mpweiher 3y ago
  It lets you get away with being lazier. At least superficially.
ctoth 3y ago
Actually if you read the study (I didn't want to give them my email either) you'll find that they can't tell generated code apart from any other code, and are just saying that code quality went down (per their metrics) in 2023. They assume it is because of Copilot. They do not demonstrate this.
- BiteCode_dev 3y ago
  Indeed, it could be a number of reasons: - Making code more accessible mean people with lower skills can contribute. - Increased in productivity increased expectations for deadlines and so there is less time for quality. - 2023 was a year with lower code quality on average for everybody. - Easier code to produce meant more code produced, and maybe it dwarfed the absolute amount of quality code, giving this impression, while the relative amount didn't change but we don't have their way of measuring good code. Etc
- JohnFen 3y ago
  > They assume it is because of Copilot. They do not demonstrate this. True. It does, however, correspond with my observations of devs at my workplace. Those who have been using copilot (and the like) have had fairly obvious drops in the quality of their work.

gtirloni 3y ago

I doubt AI is making anyone lazier and less worried about code quality, if they weren't already.

cjbgkagh 3y ago
People can learn things even if they would rather not. Allowing them to take shortcuts will diminish their learning opportunities.
- flir 3y ago
  I'm not ashamed to admit I'm learning a lot from the chatbots. And it seems to stick better, as compared to reading a manual.
  - gtirloni 3y ago
    Same here. Instead of me conforming my thoughts to some document, the chatbot works together with me and my questions. I find them very useful form learning, so much I usually start a learning session first before I ever try to search something on Google. Back to code solutions, I never ever use them if I don't understand ALL that is happening in that code. I know the bot will ignore many corner cases or that it doesn't know some subtle implications about the context where I'll deploy the code. I think someone that doesn't care about code quality was already copying and pasting code from StackOverflow and fisting the keyboard until it works then moving to the next ticket. I really don't think AI is making things worse in that regard.
fhd2 3y ago
Maybe lazy is the wrong term, but less attentive apparently. There was the Ironies of Automation paper about this: https://ckrybus.com/static/papers/Bainbridge_1983_Automatica.pdf https://ckrybus.com/static/papers/Bainbridge_1983_Automatica...
mpweiher 3y ago
It lets you get away with being lazier. At least superficially.

ctoth 3y ago

Actually if you read the study (I didn't want to give them my email either) you'll find that they can't tell generated code apart from any other code, and are just saying that code quality went down (per their metrics) in 2023. They assume it is because of Copilot. They do not demonstrate this.

BiteCode_dev 3y ago
Indeed, it could be a number of reasons: - Making code more accessible mean people with lower skills can contribute. - Increased in productivity increased expectations for deadlines and so there is less time for quality. - 2023 was a year with lower code quality on average for everybody. - Easier code to produce meant more code produced, and maybe it dwarfed the absolute amount of quality code, giving this impression, while the relative amount didn't change but we don't have their way of measuring good code. Etc
JohnFen 3y ago
> They assume it is because of Copilot. They do not demonstrate this. True. It does, however, correspond with my observations of devs at my workplace. Those who have been using copilot (and the like) have had fairly obvious drops in the quality of their work.