this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2026
416 points (98.1% liked)

Technology

85805 readers
3644 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
[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 77 points 2 days ago* (last edited 1 day ago) (49 children)

In my experience, AI is an amplifier.

Good engineers will produce more good code, because they ask the right questions, know what good looks like and check the output.

Bad engineers will produce reams more bad code. The mistakes they make will be amplified. They will give wrong and incomplete instructions, won't see what the problems are with the result and will ship it anyway.

This amplification also means people will spend a larger proportion of time reviewing than coding, which I think is less interesting.

All of this is stuff that can, to some extent, be addressed with policy. You help and instruct juniors, encourage people to better understand and own their code, or at worst reprimand them if they don't.

You can adjust expectations of product managers and explain to them that more is not better, as it always has been. Faster development can often come with bugs and tech debt and this is more of the same.

All I've said above is puts aside the ethical arguments of using or not using AI of course. That's a separate can of worms entirely.

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 1 points 10 hours ago (1 children)

Provlem being is that it is not an equal amplifier.

Good engineer spends a morning going back and forth and maybe gets something done that wild have taken them all day.

Bad engineer puts first draft slop in production in a couple of minutes.

Bad engineer gets to put out something every few minutes, good engineer works too make it actually right instead of merely looking specifically right.

[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 1 points 3 hours ago

That's true, but spaghetti code was always faster to write than good code before as well. I will agree that the speed gap probably has grown though. That's why tools like AI need discipline.

If managers and engineers don't understand that their code will turn into garbage and the business will get reputational harm and lose customers / get sued / have more tech debt to fix and they'll eventually learn their lesson. In the meantime it's going to be a painful process where upper management see extra speed, expand their scope or downsize their staff, then learn that they have crumbling foundations and need to adjust. This has publically happened a few times already. Things will stabilize in time.

load more comments (47 replies)