| ▲ | peter422 9 hours ago |
| A year ago AI wrote roughly 0% of my code and now it writes roughly 100%. Which is to say any AI study from a year ago is fairly out of date with the speed of advancement. |
|
| ▲ | bayarearefugee 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| > A year ago AI wrote roughly 0% of my code and now it writes roughly 100%. Did the amount of money you or your employer make rise by anywhere near 100% as well? Because that is really the primary question behind articles like this focusing on the economic benefits. |
|
| ▲ | steve1977 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| But that itself doesn't tell us yet how much time it saved you at the end of the day. |
| |
| ▲ | SoftTalker 8 hours ago | parent [-] | | As a developer, on my very best days I probably spent no more than 50% of my day actually writing code. So call it 4 hours of actual hands-on-keyboard coding. But AI can write code much faster than a human. In 4 hours it might be able to write what would have taken me a week. Or more. Assuming it had proper specifications for that volume of code. | | |
| ▲ | surgical_fire 7 hours ago | parent [-] | | Do you still review the code it writes? Typically it takes me as long to review code as it takes me to write it myself. The exception is repetitive coding tasks that cause my attention to drift, which LLMs can do very quickly. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | joe_the_user 9 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The study is two months old (March 13, 2026). Edit: Also, it's about writing not coding and it's point isn't that time isn't saved but even with time saved at the task, you don't get a broad decrease in total worked time for many/most workers. |
| |
| ▲ | czinck 8 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | The study was published in May 2025, and then revised in March 2026. It's based on data through December 2024, so virtually useless for saying anything about today. Given that, I actually think the conclusions of the article are backwards. If the gpt-4/gpt-4o era had a measurable 3% improvement in productivity, how much more improvement are we getting from models today that are way way better? | |
| ▲ | strangescript 8 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | The study is "new", but the data they are using is old. It has references GPT-4 for god sake. | |
| ▲ | mythrwy 9 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Right but it looks back well before that. |
|
|
| ▲ | bigstrat2003 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| AI hasn't gotten better, you've just given in to the hype. |
