These people keep citing that survey from 2025.

That kills all arguments from the article instantly.

December 2025 through today GenAI has become massively better. I’ve built things with Claude in contracted spans of time that would have been man-years in the before times.

▲

tempfile 5 hours ago | parent [-]

>> although participating developers felt they completed tasks faster using AI, they where around 19% slower

> Maybe that was true in 2025, but it's clearly not true any more - I feel so productive now!

Even if you are right, this is a completely baseless argument. The people in the study felt the exact same way! And "it's 6 months old, so I won't listen to it" is an insanely high standard. You're eliminating all the evidence!

	▲	ChicagoDave 5 hours ago \| parent \| next [-]
		That study…I would have agreed with the group at that time. Up until December, I was vocally skeptical that GenAI could be used for anything more complex than a “departmental” app. Opus and similar models completely invalidated that skepticism, especially when context windows increased. In the last two weeks I designed and deployed a new programming language that compiles in a browser. Impossible in the before times.
	▲	timmmmmmay 4 hours ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		what evidence? more than half of social science studies fail to replicate, why would I believe that this one is in the good half?