AI is clearly a force multiplier, both negative and positive.

The truth is there are prolific developers like Antirez who have built quality new projects at an incredible pace (Dwarfstar 4, Redis features).

But as unpopular as it is to say it, in the working world ~80% of developers pre-AI mostly just attended meetings, did a little busywork and committed small patches here and there. Probably around 20% really moved the needle and contributed the bulk of net new code.

Those 80% were constrained in the volume they could output pre-AI, but now they are unleashed to do a large amount of net new work but many without the skills to structure it well+maintainably.

It doesn't help that most management has been pushing on LoC over quality the past year.

I truly believe most companies as they exist today are not structured for AI. The amount of technical debt that will be created at a rapid pace is basically time delayed self destruction for most codebases if you let people run amok with low contribution standards and rubber stamped approvals.

If you treat each AI output as a small well-scoped, well-tested module, which interoperate with each other through well designed APIs, you can have high confidence in quality. But majority of people are pseudo-vibe coding and creating spaghetti monster codebases, and there's really no way to stop it without strong and tight technical oversight.

▲

ghostpepper 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

This is also the dichotomy I'm seeing. This meme sums it up https://fixupx.com/danhockenmaier/status/2021617680525172840

I like to imagine a similar dynamic happening when previous transformative technologies were invented: when the power tools like the chainsaw were invented, I wonder if there was a cohort of carpenters that dismissed them because of how much damage they could do in unskilled hands.

▲

throw310822 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> Those 80% were constrained in the volume they could output pre-AI, but now they are unleashed to do a large amount of net new work but many without the skills to structure it well+maintainably.

You could say that AI turned them from stupid and lazy to the famously dangerous combination of stupid and hardworking.

▲

slopinthebag 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Doesn’t it seem a bit odd that such a prolific developer has only managed to produce a PR for a new Redis type, and a olama fork, despite having a 100x productivity booster machine for the last 8 months?

	▲	lioeters 3 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		There are several other examples that come to mind, of prolific and respected developers turning to AI-based workflow and ever since then just constantly producing mediocre content and code. The spark is gone, the taste, the genius - whatever you call it, the human quality that made them interesting in the first place. Sure they may be more "productive" superficiallly, but they all sound the same now. Any other decent dev with access to a corporate code-generation service can get basically the same result.
	▲	therealdrag0 an hour ago \| parent \| prev \| next [-]
		False dichotomy much? The tools can be force multiplying without being “100x productivity boosting,” which I’ve never once heard claimed except from critics.
	▲	mstaoru 3 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		This is a good observation. Antirez is one my favorite authors and software developers. I'm 100% sure he could have made the same Redis PR and ds4 (or something else) without LLMs in about the same time with the same quality or higher.