1dontknow_

I really hope you really didnt rewrite Keycloak in a few days using AI tools and use it in any way professionally or production.

If you did, please do an urgent meeting with your team and dont tell anybody, just fix it. When shit hits the fan, it really hits hard.

Definitely fantasy esp "6 months to 1 day". That's just impossible physically.

Did they even sit and thought deeply before they wrote this comment or have people really just started putting out slop everywhere due too much usage of AI?

The code that was produced in 6 months before cant be even read in 1 day today so dont get me started on properly functionally producing it.

Thats very true, calling coding craftmansship or considering oneself an amazing coder but only for new projects is obviously wrong.

A great coder loves legacy old projects because theyre challenging, unpredictable, undocumented, and if you figure out, you are like a God.

Starting the perfect greenfield project and writing amazing code the first week is a skill every freshmen student at a CS college has. That's not a problem area, its a solved thing.

But do it for 10 years straight after 5 acquisitions, different infrastructure, different industry, language, culture? You are a RARE BREED.

Or even simpler put, never measure yourself with easy things, only with the hard ones since then the easy things are a joke.

Ive worked and work with people who I dont consider super talented but sure as hell they understand the code, maybe just some lines, maybe the method, maybe the class, maybe the module and further.

Unless you worked at the shittiest company in the world, lets try to not bring others down just because they weren't as amazing as we are. They might have other skills weve lacked.

E.g. like a journalist complaining that they colleagues didn't publish books... who cares? Thats not their job, they need to write clear good concluded articles. If they write their articles like books, nobody reads that shit.

That sounds a bit extreme, to me, I think code was always malleable simply from good experienced devs. The "developer with great code comprehension" just did it better I guess but it wasn't a skill shared only by the holy Coder chosen by Destiny or something.

Also comprehension is one side, its "Consuming" code, but it doesnt say anything about theyre talent of producing great code.

That's a good comparison, but I'm stuck on the "now".

Why exactly do you think code wasn't clay until a few years ago, and why is it now? It's a bit hard to tell from the article where exactly you draw the line between the two stages.

For example, the more experience I gain, the more annoyed I get when software or code is compared to machines, cars, or factories. These days, I exclusively use cooking as an analogy because it shares so many traits with software development. Using the same ingredients at the same time doesn't necessarily produce the exact same result. Everyone does things slightly differently, and there's a whole spectrum of outcomes, from factory-produced frozen pizzas to five-star Michelin dishes.

That's why I use this analogy whenever we discuss architecture and similar topics. I feel like it gets my point across much better.

Is this a slideshow or what exactly? I mean clearly its not an article, but also slideshow Id expect more images and make it more skimmable and have a sense whats front or back and which page Im at.

Im sorry I really wanted to read what you wrote but please put it in a proper form because right now its uncomfortable.

I hope at least theyre working on something usable by a real humans instead of wasting all these natural resources for some shitty ass app or AI slop.

That's easy fixed by actually taking the effort to go and use other AI harnesses. Youll see that Claude Code somehow works then it doesnt for no obvious reason, then again something else... Like there is no system to it. Its somehow obvious that it isnt developed by humans or at least not as enough as should be.

Pretty good is big word.

Theyre usable but leave alot to be desired. SOme other tools like opencode seem sometimes to have less feature (if exact numbers) but at least always work.

Somehow with Claude and some others, random simple thigns dont work. Esp long solved problems like TUI rendering, special chars, breaking changes every release etc.

Surely as always with software this is my experience and might be not yours.

PS: Ive used IntelliJ since... always?. It was quite decent. But these last years it is just so diferent, somehow way less quality, so many random bugs that Im afraid theyre doing AI agentic coding which sucks for such an important tool.

IDEs should be build from real professional crafstman with an exact vision in their heads, not some wild AI.

Im starting to think in a year or two "We dont use AI in developing our products" will be some kind of marketing trick since people will start looking for that.

Does anybody know of "Real" companies that dropped reviews due to immesne use of AI agents, successfully, and their products got visibly better (or at least not hellish worse)?

By "Real" in this context I mean companies that aren't Anthropic .i.e. don't sell any kinda AI product and existed at least 10 years before the AI boom. Esp. in regulated or at least sensitive fields like finance, banking, medical, logistics etc.

I agree with your general sentiment on bugs. Id personaly go one step further and say: Every system in the world has bugs and security holes. If its exists, its buggy because "bug" is very loosely defined as "doesnt exactly work as expected". The security topic is even more complicated.

But I also would like to point out that comparing the Linux Kernel quality and development to Claude Code is surely a joke. The former is an ocean of features, compatibility and history. The latter, in the end still one executable CLI tool calling endpoints.

They're not even comparable.

Wow I never knew about this theory! But I like your comment because ... idk, if its true at least its as simple as "Lets avoid that, and we ensure each Empire of today exists forever." I wish that was true! So how can we be sure, as somewhat smart people, that this is true and responsibly communicate it? Because everything else is dishonest and hurts our society.

Im no history expert but I know there were other Empires thru different times and sizes and places, and since now they're not the same, they "Failed"? Did they fail exactly due to the same problem or others? Are we treating those too? What is our method and how strong did we criticize it and see and understand it flaws?

At a time with fake news, AI slop and whatever the Internet has become today, its our job to treat every statement with the highest from of critical thinking at our disposal.

I like these comparison with Roman Empire but it seems too simplsitic and Ive learned that usually means "its not so right actually".

Meaning for example, what about empires that actually survived or adapted? What did they do that we know exactly didnt the Roman Empire do that saved them? How does zeitgeist impact this in the sense that what ruined Roman Empire might save a nation today?

Not trying to be negative, Im jsut geniunley curios because then if I was in government, Id be "yeah I see the same. I mscared as fuck were messing it up, but then what should we do?" because you see, everybody is giving at advice with very diverse and extreme ideas on what should happen. Probably with most of them you and I wouldnt be OK with (do Dictatorships work? ...).

Or simpler, we all agree on the problem. What are all the solutions and how do we know theyre the correct ones? Thats what Im thinking about the last years.