The AI industry's claims about AI coding assistants boosting productivity significantly appear to be massively overblown, per a new report.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.zip/post/49954591

“No Duh,” say senior developers everywhere.

The article explains that vibe code often is close, but not quite, functional, requiring developers to go in and find where the problems are - resulting in a net slowdown of development rather than productivity gains.

Then there’s the issue of finding an agreed-upon way of tracking productivity gains, a glaring omission given the billions of dollars being invested in AI.

To Bain & Company, companies will need to fully commit themselves to realize the gains they’ve been promised.

“Fully commit” to see the light? That… sounds more like a kind of religion, not like critical or even rational thinking.

  • majster@lemmy.zipEnglish
    2·
    1 hour ago

    I’m a dev at a tech startup. Most devs at the company are pretty impressed by claude code and find it very useful. Hence the company has a pretty hefty budget allocated for it.

    What I need to do is think trough the problem at hand and claude will do the code->build->unit test cycles until it satisfies the objective. In the meantime I can drink cofee in peace and go to bathroom.

    To me and to many of my coworkers its a completley new work paradigm.

  • flatbield@beehaw.orgEnglish
    12·
    4 hours ago

    I have a friend that is a professional programmer. They think AI will generate lots of work fixing the shit code it creates. I guess we will see.

    • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
      3·
      2 hours ago

      I actually think a new field of “real” programmers will emerge, in which they are specialized at looking for Ai problems. So companies using Ai and get rid of programmers, will start hiring programmers to get rid of Ai problems.

  • thingsiplay@beehaw.org
    131·
    6 hours ago

    Billions of dollars are spent, unimaginable amount of power is used, ton of programmers are fired, million of millions code is copied without license and credit, nasty bugs and security issues are added due to trusting the ai system or being lazy. Was it worth it? Many programmers get disposable as they have to use ai. That means “all” programmers are the same and differ only in what model they use, at least that’s the future if everyone is using ai from now on.

    Ai = productivity increases, quality decreases… oh wait, Ai = productivity seems to increase, quality does decrease

    • dinckelman@programming.devEnglish
      4·
      1 hour ago

      This is just a very fucked reminder of that easy success never comes without a cost. Unfortunately, normal people paid that debt, while business majors continue feeding the pump and dump machine

  • abbadon420@sh.itjust.works
    23·
    7 hours ago

    They say the same about scrum.

    “It doesn’t work in you company, because you haven’t fully implemented all aspects of scrum”

    Coincidentally it costs about a gazillion dollars to become fully Scrum certified.

        • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
          2·
          1 hour ago

          It depends on the sense of wet that you’re using. Most of the time, the relevant kind of wet is how much water something contains, and water achieves peak theoretical wetness by that definition. It’s only in specific circumstances that the surface is coated evenly by a wetting agent definition is relevant, like painting or firefighting.

            • AnyOldName3@lemmy.world
              1·
              6 minutes ago

              I know people who say exactly this kind of thing entirely seriously (potentially because they first saw it as an unlabelled joke that they took too seriously). Sometimes people are just incorrect pedants smugly picking fault with things that aren’t even wrong.