mehagar

Even if you do use AI tools to help you write the code, at some level you have to specify what the program's output should be for every possible input.

By loosely specifying things in a prompt, there's simply not enough context for the AI tool to know the "right" output to produce for all possible inputs. What's "right" is often subjective anyway ("Should this button be red or blue?").

What are you switching to?

On iOS this popover breaks scrolling, which is required to show the Chrome URL bar, meaning I have to literally close the Chrome app and reopen it to even navigate to another page. I've taken this as a sign to stop using Reddit entirely.

Same. Messy code makes it harder for us to understand and thus maintain the code (which is why people often refer to code as a liability), but is that the case for AI tools as well? If not, it seems like clean code may not matter as much anymore.

I just hope my employer comes to the same conclusion before I get laid off.

Yeah, this is the one. Android in a desktop form-factor.

I've been using AI tools to brainstorm approaches and sometimes generate code, but actually doing the typing myself. That way I'm less likely to forget the mechanics and programming language over time.

Did you read the article? The author means software in general, not just user-facing apps.

The way I see it is - AI still makes mistakes, and I have to know how things work at some point anyway. So I'd rather spend my time actually understanding fundamentals (in my case, CSS at the moment), than trying to keep up with the frequently changing AI tools and models.

Once the tools and models stabilize more (as well as the pricing model), there's less risk in me learning something that is no longer relevant.

Except when I choose to wait on learning how to use AI tools effectively, I get told I am going to be "left behind".

You make it seem like AI coding has already "totally changed" our jobs. This is exactly the FOMO the article talks about ("until its too late"). It hasn't. I'm still using the same workflows without AI tools, and so are most of my teammates.

The Nintendo Wii was like this too.

I agree. This is one area I'm hoping that AI tools can help with. Given a complex codebase that no one understands, the ability to have an agent review the code change is at least better than nothing at all.

I would normally agree, but I think the "code is a liability" quote assumes that humans are reading and modifying the code. If AI tools are also reading and modifying their own code, is that still true?

There was nothing stopping everyone from using continuous delivery today, yet many companies still rely on long cycles, manual testing and handovers. The problem isn't the tooling, it's the people.

I don't understand this part either. At some point we're writing software for people to use, and there has to be someone who comes up with the requirements based on what people want. AI doesn't change this fact.