• UltraBlack@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Can’t wait for code quality to drop, work to become more inefficiwnt and microsoft ditching AI

  • JackbyDev@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    33
    ·
    2 days ago

    Using AI isn’t optional? How about you review me on the results I produce instead of the tools I use to produce them?

  • fum@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    49
    ·
    3 days ago

    This is ridiculous. Have people seen the recent AI code review from Audacity?? This whole AI bubble needs to burst already.

  • BlameTheAntifa@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    51
    ·
    3 days ago

    They must really want their workforce to be less efficient while dramatically lowering quality and security across the board.

    • isolatedscotch@discuss.tchncs.de
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      except programmers are gonna continue with what they were already doing, at most putting a script on copilot to get the metrics

      don’t forget that if you don’t turn in the project in time you’re fired, the issues always get thrown at the coder, it’s never the company’s fault

      • absquatulate@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        2 days ago

        Company I’m at also does the forced AI and it’s all but mandatory now. Problem is as code monkeys we’re past the point of heading down to the Winchester for a pint until it blows over. They’re pushing so hard in order to “not fall behind” that you literally can’t escape it. I think even malicious compliance won’t cut it. And when 8/10 companies that dictate the market say that “this is the future”, then this is the future they’ll make whether we like it or not.

        Edit: the silver lining is that we’re working with tools that are better than copilot at generating menial work like generating boilerplate code, unit tests, release notes, walls of text for app documentation etc.

          • absquatulate@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 days ago

            We’re in the honeymoon phase, shit didn’t hit the fan yet. Problem is we devs are fucked either way. If productivity does increase, then workforce demand will go down especially for entry level devs and seniors will be relegated to vibe coding and fixing AI bugs. If it all goes south then layoffs, because line must go up!

    • IllNess@infosec.pub
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      15
      ·
      3 days ago

      They are banking on the AI will eventually be smart enough that it will replace the workers that fed it.

  • Flames5123@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    2 days ago

    It’s the same in Amazon software development. We have like 3 different AI tools. I enjoy it for unit tests and predicting the next two lines of a simple thing, but it’s not going to refactor our codebase.

  • TwitchingCheese@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    44
    ·
    3 days ago

    Apparently no longer optional for their customers either, based on how hard they are pushing it in Office 365, sorry Microsoft 365, no sorry Microsoft 365 Copilot.

    The latest change of dumping you into a Copilot chat immediately on login and hiding all the actually useful stuff is just desperation incarnate.

    • voluble@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      3 days ago

      The process to log in to the online portal of Outlook is so bad it’s crossed into comical territory. So much friction, only to shunt you to a full screen clippy copilot page.

      I’d be curious to know what the usage statistics are for that page. Like, what could a person possibly accomplish there?

  • Evotech@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    13
    ·
    2 days ago

    Start using ai to write all your mails and communication with managers. Turn it to LinkedIn max

  • doctortofu@piefed.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    35
    ·
    3 days ago

    How very corporate of them: people don’t want to do something? Screw finding out why, let’s make it mandatory and poof, problem solved!

    • unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de
      cake
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      33
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      3 days ago

      Nah its just part of the MLM scheme that is “AI”. Its useful because they said it would be useful. Its worth the investment because it cost a lot of money. Once you realize that all these companies care about is revenue and “growth” then it all clicks. It doesnt have to work or be profitable, it just needs to look good to investers.

      They will even go as far as firing loads of workers and saying publicly that they “replaced them with AI” while in reality those workers were just doing something that the company was willing to sacrifice. They just replaced something with nothing to make it look like their magic AI can actually do things.

      Cory Doctorow put it better than i ever could: https://pluralistic.net/2025/05/07/rah-rah-rasputin/
      The whole post is good but i will just quote this section.

      The “boy genius” story is an example of Silicon Valley’s storied “reality distortion field,” pioneered by Steve Jobs. Like Jobs, Zuck is a Texas marksman, who fires a shotgun into the side of a barn and then draws a target around the holes. Jobs is remembered for his successes, and forgiven his (many, many) flops, and so is Zuck. The fact that pivot to video was well understood to have been a catastrophic scam didn’t stop people from believing Zuck when he announced “metaverse.”

      Zuck lost more than $70b on metaverse, but, being a boy genius Texas marksman, he is still able to inspire confidence from credulous investors. Zuck’s AI initiatives generated huge interest in Meta’s stock, with investors betting that Zuck would find ways to keep Meta’s growth going, despite the fact that AI has the worst unit economics of any tech venture in living memory. AI is a business that gets more expensive as time goes on, and where the market’s willingness to pay goes down over time. This makes the old dotcom economics of “losing money on every sale, but making it up in volume” look positively rosy.

      • SpaceRanger13@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        29
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        3 days ago

        I think shouldn’t is better to say than can’t. They are definitely going to try.

      • ceenote@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        21
        ·
        edit-2
        3 days ago

        Their hope is probably that AI can let current employees bear a greater workload so they can downsize.

        • tarknassus@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          19
          ·
          3 days ago

          Ding! Any gains in productivity will mean more work for less people.

          Anyone who can’t see this coming - I have several bridges for sale.

          • localme@lemm.ee
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            2 days ago

            Yeah and what it should mean is the same productivity (or slightly higher) over fewer hours worked. So everyone can get more of their lives back to go be happy and spend time with their friends and families. Or literally whatever else people would rather being doing besides working all the damn time.

        • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          3 days ago

          This is the material explanation. They expect increased productivity and therefore higher output and therefore higher profits from the same workforce. Not necessarily to downsize. Downsizing or upsizing would be dictated by a combination of the realized productivity gains and the uptake of their products by the market.

      • shadowfax13@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        3 days ago

        suits have been replacing long term essential employees with outsourced trash even before in name of global redundancy and efficiency. now they will just the ai buzz word to hide behind.

      • salacious_coaster@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        3 days ago

        Microsoft support was already mostly useless. So, yeah, a useless AI probably could replace that, but it would also probably be more expensive.

  • BrianTheeBiscuiteer@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    46
    ·
    3 days ago

    Same at my company. The frustrating part is they want us to use coding assistance, which is fine, but I really don’t code that much. I spend most of my time talking to other teams and vendors, reading docs, filing tickets, and trying to assign tasks to Jr devs. For AI to help me with that I need to either type all of my thoughts into the LLM which isn’t efficient at all or I need it to integrate with systems I’m not allowed to integrate with because there are SLOs that need to be maintained (i.e. can’t hammer the API and make others experience worse).

    So it’s pretty much the same as it’s always been. Instead of making a gallon of lemonade out of one lemon I need to use this “new lemonade machine” to start a multinational lemonade business.

    • vaderaj@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      3 days ago

      The key highlight being: you don’t need more than a gallon of lemonade. I for once wished big corps heard their engineers and domain experts over wall street loving exec’s.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        3 days ago

        Why would they do that? If they’re making better quarterly results by listening to Wall St, that’s what the system tells them to do.