this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
425 points (90.6% liked)

Technology

87814 readers
3457 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Acid_Burn@lemmy.dbzer0.com 54 points 2 days ago (6 children)

AI is like a power tool. If you give a contractor a nail gun instead of a hammer he can build a house faster. If you give someone who has no idea how to build a house a nail gun they'll just fail at building a house faster than if you only gave them a hammer and they'll probably hurt themselves.

[–] douglasg14b@lemmy.world 22 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Problem being that the majority of software engineers really don't know how to build software well.

And are using AI as a tool to just accelerate their lack of engineering.

[–] Zephyr@sh.itjust.works 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

This is a very old discussion and argument, much older than the current AI push. You're right to a degree but also that hasn't stopped the rise of strong minds for software development. There will always be the curious and the lazy. The curious will always want to know how things work from the chain of events of a button click to the pixel shifts and logic gate flips to display code on a screen as well as run it. There will also always be the lazy unencumbered by such a desire for awareness who just want the magic box to do the thing.

How many software devs can write in assembly? Not many. Not much has changed if anything beyond the ability of the unaware to see their will come into creation. People couldn't make realistic images and now they snap selfies with no barriers to entry. Does that make them a photographer or an artist? Not really.

[–] KairuByte@lemmy.dbzer0.com 6 points 2 days ago

Could this not be said for IDEs with code awareness such as M$’s intellisense, among other tools that accelerate development speed?

What you are describing isn’t an AI problem, is people taking a two week bootcamp and calling themselves a software engineer.

[–] devedeset@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago

There's a ton of app builders out there that are basically some crypto scam wrapped around Claude (or whatever). There's a lot of idiots pumping out code slop.

[–] dreadbeef@lemmy.dbzer0.com 4 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

I can build my bosses app faster with ai, but I would never build any app I want to maintain with it. It's too low quality code for my standards.

[–] onnekas@sopuli.xyz 2 points 2 days ago

I think there is a middle ground where you can absolutely build apps faster with the help of ai and still get maintainable code.

Just don't let AI write a whole app in one shot. Or even whole features.

and they'll probably hurt themselves.

You can hit your thumb quite good with a hammer too.

[–] 0x0@lemmy.zip 2 points 2 days ago

...more like a nailgun that, more frequently than not, shoots backwards.

[–] ZILtoid1991@lemmy.world 0 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think there could be some potential usecases for LLMs, but that's not code generation (at least code that is not in the finished product), nor having it look up stuff in technical documentation.

Everyone is trying to chase the rational adaptation case. Everyone wants to 10x their projects, yet keep control over them, or at least 2x their productivity. But I've seen just as many people going insane from at least first trying to use it as a tool as vibe coders.

[–] G_M0N3Y_2503@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

Code is probably one of the easiest things to verify, for that reason I struggle to see any other viable uses for LLMs tbh.

user: write code that correctly asserts what 1+1 equals.
LLM: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 4);
LLM: hmmm, that crashed.
LLM: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 3);
LLM: hmmm, that also crashed, I must be doing something wrong, let me try one more time.
LLM: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 2);
LLM: that worked!
LLM Response: assert_eq!(1 + 1, 2);
user: what does this sentence mean? "Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo"
LLM Response: This doesn't mean anything, or someone really likes buffalo's

I can always run the code to check, I still don't know how that sentence makes sense.

[–] wewbull@feddit.uk 2 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Code is probably one of the easiest things to verify

LOL!!!!

[–] G_M0N3Y_2503@lemmy.zip 1 points 1 day ago

I am a software engineer by trade, so biases' being what they are. But what I was more trying to demonstrate is that it is provable. Not that making the proof is easy.

[–] SuperNovaStar@lemmy.blahaj.zone 1 points 2 days ago (2 children)

That's because it needs a semicolon:

Buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo; buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

Also it isn't a very good sentence because you've said the same thing twice.

It should read:

Buffalo buffalo buffalo; Buffalo buffalo buffalo Buffalo buffalo.

Translation:

"Buffalo" is a place, a noun (more or less meaning bison), and a verb (to harass or bully). So what it means is:

Bison bully bison; Buffalo bison bully Buffalo bison.

[–] atx_aquarian@lemmy.world 1 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Hmm, I don't see how semicolons work in this sentence.

Marking up the sentence with extras to help visualize:

Buffalo-buffalo (who) Buffalo-buffalo (do) buffalo (in return also) buffalo (the other) Buffalo-buffalo.

A sentence of similar structure, subbing components for others of the same language parts...

  • Buffalo buffalo → other nouns qualified by adjectives
    • Foreign cars
    • Austin techbros
    • big money
  • buffalo (verb) → other verbs
    • covet
    • cost

... would be:

Foreign cars Austin techbros covet cost big money.

(edit: I couldn't quickly think of a location adjective for the last noun, which would have stuck to the pattern more closely, but "big" is still the same role, an adjective.)

That works too! It's basically nonsense, but since they are valid adjectives and nouns and verbs you can construct almost any structure of sentence with them.

[–] G_M0N3Y_2503@lemmy.zip 1 points 2 days ago (1 children)

hmmm, I just copied from Wikipedia as my primary source. That was the faux pas that was cool before AI.

I happen to think wikipedia is still cool :)