My experience with AI seems to be totally different than for most people. As an example, the other day asks chatgpt to write a configuration file for SQL fluff that formatted the code as an example that I provided.

It proceeded to invent all the SQL fluff rules. And the ones that were actual rules were useless for the actual format that I wanted. I get it, SQLFluff rules are really confusing, but that's why I asked for help. I know how to code python I don't need AI to write code that then I will need to review

▲

scotty79 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I think that's a very common experience when you try to make it write niche stuff. It just makes everything up wholesale. If you on the other hand wanted to write a react app ...

▲

gonzalohm 3 days ago | parent [-]

But then I may as well have the AI say no, I don't know how to do that, here are some useful resources. Instead of misleading me and making me waste my time figuring out why the code doesn't work

	▲	scotty79 3 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		We might get there at some point. But it's not natural for this technology. It wasn't trained to recognize what it does and doesn't know. But I'm hopeful. It was terrible at doing math as well and it's getting significantly better with just more effort. It might be hard to tune it though so that AI won't claim that it doesn't know something when it does, by error, or just because it doesn't like you. It's not uncommon for a student to say they don't know something they actually do when they are questioned.
	▲	PessimalDecimal 3 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		Maybe that idea has probably been considered (a lot) and never implemented because the can't tell?

▲

theshrike79 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

There was a post somewhere that said if an AI invents a method or rule for something, it actually should be there. =)

It's a statistical prediction machine and it says your library should have a do_foo function. Is there a reason why it doesn't have one?

▲

troupo 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> My experience with AI seems to be totally different than for most people.

It's not different from most people. Everyone runs into AI bullshit. However, hype and new tech optimism overrides everything.

▲

danielbln 3 days ago | parent [-]

Or, you know, there are different ways of using these tools. Slapping something into ChatGPT is one way, though maybe not the most efficient way of getting value out of these tools.

▲

gonzalohm 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

So what should I have done differently? If I have to spend 1 hour to setup the AI tools then I'm not saving any time

▲

danielbln 3 days ago | parent [-]

Using an agentic coding assistant would be the first step (there are many, Cline, Claude Code, Gemini CLI and various others) as those can traverse the code base, execute tests, run queries or web search and feed the outputs back into itself to validate correctness of whatever the agent has created/done.

You won't need to set up this stuff for an hour every time, you set it up once and then you just give it commands.

The skill ceiling is deceptive, it feels very low at first (after all, it's just natural language, right?) but getting an intuition for where these tools work best and where they break down, how to task them, what to include in the instructions, it takes a bit of using them first.

That said, if you're a code maximalist, if you get most enjoyment out of hand crafting code or of you don't feel comfortable communicating effectively or delegating work, then maybe these tools aren't for you.

At this point in time I'm also pretty much over proselytizing anyone, I get a TON of value out of this stuff, but everbody has to find their own workflows.

	▲	gonzalohm 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		How would adding my codebase help when I literally was starting from scratch and that's why I needed the configuration file?

▲

troupo 3 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> Or, you know, there are different ways of using these tools.

There aren't. Every new "one true way of doing it" that changes every few days runs into these problems.

▲

danielbln 3 days ago | parent [-]

Every iteration of the tools improves the output quality, many of the problems from a year ago are not problems today.

▲

troupo 3 days ago | parent [-]

And new problems appear. This remains a fact of life: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44702776

▲

danielbln 3 days ago | parent [-]

Definitely, but isn't that progress? We solve problems and new problems appear, which we also solve. Rinse and repeat until the sun blows up.

▲

troupo 3 days ago | parent [-]

> Definitely, but isn't that progress?

That is beside the point of the original comment

> We solve problems and new problems appear, which we also solve.

In AI space these are not new problems. These are the same "let's try this new magic incantation agains a non-deterministic black box".

▲

danielbln 3 days ago | parent [-]

Ok man, you do you. I'm over here making food use of this tooling, but it's not for everyone. Agree to disagree.

▲

troupo 3 days ago | parent [-]

> I'm over here making food use of this tooling, but it's not for everyone.

Yup, you're the one using perfect tooling that never produces any issues, or erroneous output, and is perfect in every way.

Unlike these idiot opponents of yours who don't have the intelligence and skill to use these amazing magical tools.

Or, perhaps, your opponents actually use these tools daily and actually understand what they can and can't do?

▲

danielbln 3 days ago | parent [-]

Who says these tools don't make any mistakes? Don't put words in my mouth or project your own fallacies. Nothing in the world is perfect, but there is absolutely useful stuff to be had.

Keep your head in the sand though.

	▲	troupo 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> Who says these tools don't make any mistakes? You heavily imply it in every comment you write. You've literally started debating my comment where I say that everyone runs into AI bullshit. You literally keep debating me when I point out that despite all the progress AI bullshit remains. Your literal answer to "It's not different from most people. Everyone runs into AI bullshit." was literally "Or, you know, there are different ways of using these tools." > Nothing in the world is perfect, but there is absolutely useful stuff to be had. Says the person claiming I put words in his mouth or projecting my fallacies. Where exactly did I say this stuff wasn't useful? Literally nowehere. > Keep your head in the sand though Someone recently told me: "Don't put words in my mouth or project your own fallacies. " Adieu.