That’s like, not a good thing dude
@casmael @Ninjazzon @technology It would be an amazing thing but there is so little support for workers in America that we all fear the destitution that will result.
Imagine if a worker replaced by ai could still maintain their life through UI, it would actually be awesome to be replaced by machines.
There saying it’s not a good thing because code produced by AI is riddled with problems, today.
Edit: AI code could explain the unstable experience in some recent updates to Microsoft Teams…
we can tell
That exains a lot…
I do use AI to assist my programming, but I always take what it suggests as likely highly flawed. It frequently sends me in the right direction but almost never is fully correct. I read the answers carefully, throw away answers frequently, and never use a solution without modifying it in some way.
Also, it is terrible at handling more complex tasks. I just use it to help me construct small building blocks while I design and build the larger code.
If 30% of my code was written by AI it would be utter trash.
AI is like a utils library: it can do well known boilerplate like sorting very well, but it’s not likely to actually write your code for you
AI is like fill down in spreadsheets: it can repeat a sequence with slight, obvious modifications but it’s not going to invent the data for you
AI is like static analysis for tests: it can roughly write test outlines, but they might not actually tell you anything about the state of the code under test
Well said. Fully agreed.
And presumably must developers at Microsoft take a similar approach (all the ‘this explains everything’ comments notwithstanding, so it’s ridiculous that they’re even tracking this as a metric. If 30% is AI generated, but the devs had to throw away 90% of it, that doesn’t mean you could get rid of the developer, as they did a huge amount of work just checking the AI and potentially fixing stuff after it.
This is a metric that is misleading and will cause management to make the wrong decisions.
I wonder how they measure that. Writing 30% of loc with AI seems like it will be terrible. Writing 30% of each loc with AI (i.e. autocomplete) seems feasible
Yeah, what percentage of their code was previously written by Intellisense, because I suspect this is just copilot replacing intellisense plus a little more.
Copilot is great for:
a) replacing intellisense
b) minor refractors / and very short method writing
c) writing out boiler plate / test code
I mean, autocorrect has written about 50 percent of this comment, but that doesn’t mean my phone is writing it for me as much as it accelerates what I wanted to type in the first place.
Maybe that’s how they got to a 30% estimate, cause ain’t no other way that would have worked
Given they made a big hoohah a few years ago of getting rid of most of their QA—this in combination is a particularly bad look
Pathetic
I could believe this.
But how is their OS or any other product even close to functional at that point?
Is it tho?
I’m using Windows daily.
I never said it was good, but it is functional.
I wonder if Microsoft has a model that learns from their own source code. I have tried having copilot write sql queries and they work (without modification) about 10% of the time
