Skip Navigation

Posts
2
Comments
135
Joined
1 yr. ago

  • The doctors were worse, not just taking longer. So this would be more like people unlearning division.

    While people using calculators may occasionally be unlearning division, this seems less problematic than doctors unlearning how to spot cancer on their own (since then I'm guessing you won't have AI training data anymore since apparently AI can't feed into AI without collapse) or software engineers unlearning how to write correct code.

    You also wouldn't want a mathematician unlearning how to do division.

  • All the studies I've found so far seem to disagree, so why should we believe you?

    https://www.anthropic.com/research/AI-assistance-coding-skills (2026 study)

    We found that using AI assistance led to a statistically significant decrease in mastery.

    Using AI sped up the task slightly, but this didn’t reach the threshold of statistical significance.

    https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/new-findings-ai-coding-overhyped (2025 study)

    But those claims appear to be massively overblown, as The Register reports, with researchers finding that productivity gains are modest at best — and at worst, that AI can actually slow down human developers.

  • Says who, that we can't suggest that?

  • I also think there still hasn't been a study showing consistent long term significant(!) productivity gain for coders. (Other than lines of code in total, but that alone is a poor measure.) The amount of new hidden bugs and other issues seem to outweigh most of the perceived gains.

  • Most of my code is public if you're curious!

  • We need the equivalent investment now. If average code is cheap, then the scarce resource is no longer the ability to produce it. The scarce resource is the ability to read it, to navigate it

    You know what would help a lot with understanding the code one is working on? Writing it yourself without turning your brain off via AI.

    But that's an insight the article somehow seems to be missing.

  • Yeah the real fix is probably gonna be the stop killing games movement, since it seems like the issue is more that publishers seem to have forgotten what a purchase is and less so the difference of physical vs digital.

  • "Ask AI" sounds more like "feed copyrighted book excerpt to AI slop engine to be regurgitated in the future" button to me, oof.

    I'll never quite get how any apps for literature think big data server-side AI is a good idea to add. Even as optional feature it doesn't seem like a great look.

  • The "archaic devices" framing of the article seems questionable to me. I don't think a device from around 9 years ago (Ryzen Gen 1) is archaic. While these are going to be low end now they often are still perfectly usable if they were somewhat higher end at the time. They don't lack anything a modern system should need, which is easily proven by Linux running on them just fine.

  • Not like the AfD is about to become the most popular party, it's really very unlike ~1933 for sure, for sure. (/s)

  • I don't have much more to say other than I doubt the data backs up what you're saying at all.

  • So what does the signed-off-by magically solve here for you, that doesn't require either you or the contributor to legally review every line? If you're not a lawyer, is your contributor going to be one?