| |
| ▲ | Eufrat 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I get the impression there’s a very strong bimodal experience of these tools and I don’t consider that an endorsement of their long-term viability as they are right now. For me, I am genuinely curious why this is. If the tool was so obviously useful and a key part of the future of software engineering, I would expect it to have far more support and adoption. Instead, it feels like it works for selected use cases very well and flounders around in other situations. This is not an attack on the tech as junk or useless, but rather that it is a useful tech within its limits being promoted as snake oil which can only end in disaster. | | |
| ▲ | simonw 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | My best guess is that the hype around the tooling has given the false impression that it's easy to use - which leads to disappointment when people try it and don't get exactly what they wanted after their first prompt. | | |
| ▲ | Eufrat 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | I think you and a lot of people have spent a lot of energy getting as much out of these models as you can and I think that’s great, but I agree that it’s not what they’re being sold as and there is plenty of space for people to treat these tools more conservatively. The idea that is being paraded around is that you can prompt the AI and the black box will yield a fully compliant, secure and robust product. Rationality has long since gone out of the window with this and I think that’s sorta the problem. People who don’t understand these tools see them as a way to just get rid of noisome people. The fact that you need to spend a fair amount of money, fiddle with them by cajoling them with AGENTS.md, SKILL.md, FOO.md, etc. and then having enough domain experience to actually know when they’re wrong. I can see the justification for a small person shop spending the time and energy to give it a try, provided the long-term economics of these models makes them cost-effective and the model is able to be coerced into working well for their specific situation. But we simply do not know and I strongly suspect there’s been too much money dumped into Anthropic and friends for this to be an acceptable answer right now as illustrated by the fact that we are seeing OKRs where people are being forced to answer loaded questions about how AI tooling has improved their work. |
|
| |
| ▲ | AdieuToLogic 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > If you haven't seen coding agents produce working code you've not been paying attention for the past 3-12 months. If you believe coding agents produce working code, why was the decision below made? Amazon orders 90-day reset after code mishaps cause
millions of lost orders[0]
0 - https://www.businessinsider.com/amazon-tightens-code-control... | | |
| ▲ | erklik 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Good journalism would include : https://www.aboutamazon.com/news/company-news/amazon-outage-... I find it somewhat overblown. Also, I think there's a difference between working code and exceptionally bug-free code. Humans produce bugs all the time. I know I do at least. | |
| ▲ | simonw 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You appear to be confusing "produce working code" with "exclusively produce working code". | | |
| ▲ | AdieuToLogic 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | > You appear to be confusing "produce working code" with "exclusively produce working code". The confusion is not mine own. From the article cited: Dave Treadwell, Amazon's SVP of e-commerce services, told
staff on Tuesday that a "trend of incidents" emerged since
the third quarter of 2025, including "several major"
incidents in the last few weeks, according to an internal
document obtained by Business Insider. At least one of
those disruptions were tied to Amazon's AI coding assistant
Q, while others exposed deeper issues, another internal
document explained.
Problems included what he described as "high blast radius
changes," where software updates propagated broadly because
control planes lacked suitable safeguards. (A control plane
guides how data flows across a computer network).
It appears to me that "Amazon's SVP of e-commerce services" desires producing working code and has identified the ramifications of not producing same. | | |
| ▲ | simonw 4 hours ago | parent [-] | | That's why I'm writing a guide about how to use this stuff to produce good code. |
|
|
|
|
