draebek

> I don't think it's that early tbh, agentic coding has ~90% adoption in the US.

Where does that 90% figure come from?

> Viral disease is not being associated with more and more long term diseases.

You meant to write "now being associated with more and more long term diseases", right?

I just actually thought that many of the great artists absolutely did paint, sculpt, or draw their creations "by hand", themselves. I suppose they used tools: the brush, chisel, pencil. Not sure how comparable those are to having an LLM write code for you.

Is this sarcasm? I can't tell.

You know they cause a majority of the code of the core logic to execute, right? Are you sure the tests actually check that those bits of logic are doing the right thing? I've had Claude et al. write me plenty of tests that exercise things and then explicitly swallow errors and pass.

What's your prediction: Proportionally fewer, same, or more people hurt, compared to the first time?

The replies to this thread cannot be serious, on a web forum populated—I thought—primarily by technologists. Surely you all remember the variations on, "If you make encryption illegal then only criminals will have encryption"?

The next step will surely be to make use of communication programs that law enforcement cannot read illegal, right? The police find some person who has committed a crime, caught in the ways that criminals are usually caught, such as with forensics, or simply with the guns and drugs in the boot of their car. Then they can see what forms of communication this person was using, and who was using it with them. At that point, it doesn't matter what those other people were doing: The use of banned encryption technology is the crime. You can roll them up for that, or use evidence of this crime to justify further intrusion into their meatspace lives. And so it goes, on up the chain of a criminal organization. Theoretically, at least.

I don't like this, I don't support this, but as has been said elsewhere in this thread: Let's not pretend this is some insurmountable problem for a government who has already shown an appetite for surveillance.

I was under the impression that, at least for models without "reasoning", asking them to be terse hampered their ability to give complete and correct answers? Not so?

Can you clarify, are you sympathetic of the person who thinks they wouldn't get an answer from the other team, or are you saying the person was wrong to not just ask the other team?

Asking since I've been in the situation many a time where the other team is too busy to reply in a timely fashion, and/or they don't even know the answers to my question, so I end up having to reverse engineer it.

I have to say that I am worried that, by taking myself out of the loop for the 99%, I'm going to get worse at the 1% of things that occasionally fall into my lap because the LLM can't seem to do them. I think software engineering is a skill that is "use it or lose it", like many others.

There's also the question of whether I will enjoy my craft if it is reduced to, say, mostly being a business analyst and requirements gatherer. Though the people paying me probably don't care very much about that question.