this post was submitted on 01 Sep 2026
201 points (92.8% liked)

Technology

87680 readers
3379 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
[–] katze@lemmy.4d2.org 41 points 9 hours ago (3 children)

Any engineer fighting the use of LLM’s will ultimately find that their peers are achieving more in a shorter time then they are.

How do you measure that?

I am asking because I tried all the AI coding tools (copilot, cursor, claude code, etc.), even the paid versions, to find the utopia that doubles my productivity where lots of people are talking about. But everytime I find they take more time to generate code than me typing it, they rarely get things right the first time, they produce way more code than needed (which is much more to reason about) and all in all it takes longer to achieve something using "AI" instead of doing it on my own.

The worst results are the ones that seem to be correct, but can only be found incorrect on closer inspection. For instances, a part of my job is to write data collection applications for sensors; those sensors come with a datasheet (usually 100 to 200 pages) that explain how to "talk" to the sensor. Sounds perfect for an LLM - throw the datasheet in, get a small C application out. But either I get something that does not even compile, or something that seems to collect data, but configures the sensor completely wrong. Debugging that takes more time than just working through the datasheet myself and program it myself.

[–] uuj8za@piefed.social 6 points 3 hours ago

Yeah, my work is forcing us to use Claude for everything now. More than ever, I'm convinced that using AI is slower and worse than me just doing it by hand.

UNLESS, if I blindly accept the output, then Claude is faster. Sure, I can close the ticket in 15 minutes. Is it right? Idk. Is it good? Idk. Does it have bugs? Idk. Did it make shit up? Idk. Did anything even get compiled or tested? Idk. The ticket is closed though and that's all that matters, apparently.

[–] technocrit@lemmy.dbzer0.com 1 points 2 hours ago* (last edited 2 hours ago)

How do you measure that?

The other day I did a google search for a basic JavaScript function. Gemini gave me almost the exact function that I needed. Should I have closed my eyes or smashed my head with a hammer until I forgot? Ofc I used it. It was the first result, helpful, and easy.

I don't believe in "AI" since it doesn't exist, but these augmented or summarized searches can definitely be helpful. I imagine it's the same with other LLMs, search engines, etc.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 0 points 4 hours ago* (last edited 4 hours ago) (1 children)

Well that's because copilot and cursor are pure shit, and claude code is overpriced and over rated.

TBH I have been hopping between agent frameworks, but mostly I use locally run Qwen or Deepseek to draft individual function blocks or brainstorm in a notepad interface:

https://github.com/lmg-anon/mikupad

And manually insert them as I review the code... I like my stuff uncomplicated and unobstructed.

If I were to pick an API provider today, I'd buy one year of Xiaomi MiMo, because it is dirt cheap and good enough. GLM and Deepseek are great, but more expensive since they are popular now.

[–] midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 2 hours ago (1 children)

They are really not that distinct, all the models cheat off each other just like they cheat copyrights.

The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages. The idea that maybe they didn't know enough about how to interact with ai, and that's why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we're all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.

You've obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive. Somebody that isn't impressed by Claude premium isn't going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that's valid for them. You're not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 0 points 1 hour ago* (last edited 1 hour ago) (1 children)

I dispute all of this

The entire premise of chatbots is to have a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages.

Absolutely not. This is not what text models were made for, it's what jerks like Altman and Modi twisted them into with marketing.

The idea that maybe they didn’t know enough about how to interact with ai, and that’s why it failed to help them, is a little silly, and the more you explain how we’re all using ai wrong, the sillier you look.

I'm not blaming the user, I'm saying they're crap services. I think the superlative/cursing is necessary here; they are so bad and enshittified it is astounding.

You’ve obviously sunk a lot of costs into genai, both in time and money, and that is making you defensive.

I have paid a total of a few bucks into APIs, I've never had a Claude or OpenAI subscription in my life. I don't know why you would assume this.

Somebody that isn’t impressed by Claude premium isn’t going to do any of what you suggest, let alone get any more value out of it, and that’s valid for them. You’re not seriously interested in helping them professionally, you are just insecure.

I'm not insecure about this. I don't need LLMs or generative ML, though I am interested in it. I have many dire personal issues, but people are free to program however they wish and I'm not going to gaslight anyone about that.

I do think text models have been bastardized into "a simple natural-language interface instead of those scary GUIs and programming languages." That is NOT what they were intended to do, no matter how much Claude tries to sell people on it. I think this misunderstanding is extremely important because it's exactly what's propping up abominations/scams like OpenAI/Anthropic.

But they can still be extremely useful tools in narrower scopes, like all machine learning has for over a decade, and I'm not going to shy away advocating for that. I do resent all of LLMs being pigeonholed so tightly, and if people are going to try them, I at least want to point them to a more reasonable/frugal source than Claude premium and Claude Code.

[–] midribbon_action@lemmy.blahaj.zone 3 points 1 hour ago (1 children)

Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them. If you're not even willing to accept that you have sunk costs relating to genai, your stating "I'm not insecure about this" is really not compelling.

[–] brucethemoose@lemmy.world 1 points 13 minutes ago* (last edited 12 minutes ago)

Evangelizing llms is pretty much all you do on here, you have spent an enormous amount of time and effort on them.

This is a fair point. I talk about it a lot here, too much TBH.

Sorting by New Comments, topics like this are mostly what come up and peak my interest... I suppose I need to curate/moderate my Lemmy feed, like I've been telling myself I should do for some time.