> A lot of code is being written and a lot of it is going to be a real future burden.

This assumes that the models of the future won't find it easier to just throw the code away and rebuild it

This also assumes that the same application build by humans wouldn't become a "spaghetti mess".

And the models of the future will surely be better than they are today. This stuff is still a very long way from maturity.

Sometimes it seems like they're moving very slowly. That makes sense: It's easy to get used to how they work today and it is also easy to forget how much worse they were last year.

When we look back and realize that just 4 years ago these tools didn't really exist at all, it becomes clear that the rate of progress is rather amazing.

In 4 years, we've gone from "hah, good luck with that crap!" to "little kids writing music-learning games on their own in a few minutes"

That's pretty friggin' awesome, and it's not finished yet. :)

	▲	nozzlegear 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		> And the models of the future will surely be better than they are today. This stuff is still a very long way from maturity. Since this is Claude, the models of the future might be more expensive, or more locked down, or might decide your 8yo is actually trying to build a cleverly disguised bomb so her request gets silently downgraded to a dumber model, etc.

▲

fsniper 8 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

AI writes faster, so the rate it incurs tech debt is proportionally higher. However it's ability to have large context kept on memory compared to humans is also a key component fighting against it. These are occasionally forgotten when code quality of AI for large code bases are discussed. So Yes I think humans also build spaghetti, but as they write slower they get to the same place a lot later. However humans can't correct it, or can't correct it fast enough. AI can.

	▲	aselimov3 4 hours ago \| parent [-]
		It does somewhat depend on the application size. Seems to me that for regular software projects (that aren't enterprise SaaS) a good programmer will create better software than Claude. Maybe the dehumanizing way to say it is that humans have more efficient/improved retrieval. The amount of time I see repeat code for no reason, or code/context that has been obviously missed is absurd.