this post was submitted on 14 May 2026
170 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

84890 readers
3037 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] shirro@aussie.zone 46 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

I love tech. My brain loves soaking up new things. Currently writing my first ever game engine in my 50s in c with my kid based on books and include files. Better late than never.

The technology was never the problem. It's the money people. Always was. The Marxists got that bit right. Some of the tech bros are from a tech background but their culture and motivations aren't like mine.

The money person these days follows the drug pusher/pimp model. They want to control you and have you on a hook. Everything has gaming machine mechanisms built in to keep you coming back. You can't walk away. They have all your data, all your connections. You are helpless. A victim, but you walked right into it. Final victory for them is to lobotomise all your higher order thinking skills. Your just a body to lie there and be fucked.

[–] FosterMolasses@leminal.space 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

Sounds fun! Any plans to release something on itch/steam?

[–] Danquebec@sh.itjust.works 2 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Final victory for them is to lobotomise all your higher order thinking skills. Your just a body to lie there and be fucked.

Sounds fun! Any plans to release something on itch/steam?

Reading this then your reply made me smile.

[–] arcine@jlai.lu 40 points 1 week ago (19 children)

The "correct" way to use AI for coding (and anything really) is to ask for explanations / tutorials when you can't find one online, then learn from that.

Never let it do something for you. That's how you lose. If you're not actively learning, you're actively rotting, and that goes for life in general too.

[–] tobebannedbygaymods@lemmy.zip 4 points 1 week ago

So Using it as my emotional dumbing machine is wrong ?

[–] white_nrdy@programming.dev 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I have started using LLM tools recently after taking a new job where a lot of people do it. I've discovered that it's actually fairly helpful not only for explanations, but in two other respects

  • Sifting through immense amounts of documentation. I have to deal with some datasheets that are hundreds of pages, where there will be info scattered throughout. It's very helpful sifting through those.
  • Doing boiler plate "plumbing work" in my code. I'm mostly drawing a line where I don't want it doing the "core" work in that which I'm an expert, since I agree that if I stop doing that, I'll atrophy. However it can help accelerate my process if I pass off some of the minutiae that I don't feel the need to do.

However all that said, I am honestly pretty impressed how well it works. I've mostly been using Claude, and damn, it's honestly pretty competent. I had it make me a helper Python GUI program for me to test some stuff (I'm not a UI/high level engineer like that, I'm an FPGA Engineer), and it did a decent job. It definitely needed a good amount of massaging and guidance. However I can definitely see the appeal, and I think it's a slippery slope, and I need to make sure I remain disciplined in not letting it do everything

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago (3 children)

One trap is to trust it as a means to accomodate unreasonable schedule pressure.

Sure - this thing looks like it works, hell it probably does work, do you really want to launch a probably works product? If your management does - consider shopping around for a raise/promotion under different management. It's never easy to move, but if you're moving on your own terms you can often make the effort worth your while.

Another note: I find the LLMs to be wickedly detail oriented code reviewers - like, they'll point out the tiniest little discrepancies and edge cases, and what they (Claude, at least) report is usually "real." Now, that doesn't mean they find everything that's wrong on the first pass, but once you've addressed everything in the first pass, you can make a second pass, and a third, etc. each time with different focus: documentation complete? implementation functions as intended? technical debt? test coverage? security issues? issues with maintainability? documentation in sync with implementation? specific aspect of implementation functions as intended? etc. - if you address all the findings after each review cycle (and addressing a finding can be clarifying a requirement to relax about certain unimportant aspects...) eventually the findings slow down / only find ridiculously unimportant things.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Hiro8811@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

I don't think that's a good idea, if you can't find an explanation online that means that there's not much info available in which case the best thing would be to ask on a forum, that way other people that look for that info will find it.

[–] Shayeta@feddit.org 14 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Not really, google results have been just that bad for the last 10 years. I can spend 10min looking for a piece of documentation on something and not find it. Or I can prompt an internet-connected AI and have it spit out links to relevant docs. It's gotten THAT bad.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] arcine@jlai.lu 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Usually, the LLM's response will be incomplete or partially incorrect, but it's often good enough to get un-stuck.

Usually it will have some keywords you can look up, some bits that bring up further questions for you to answer (and for which the LLM should also not be your first choice).

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 11 points 1 week ago (10 children)

Developers who are told to use AI whether they like it or not, however, tell a different story.

Well there's the problem.

I'm a software developer and I say that AI is the greatest force-multiplier that's been introduced into the field since the compiler. I love using it, it handles the most tedious and annoying parts of the process. But there are situations I don't want to use it in, and of course being forced to use would give me a more negative opinion of it. Obviously.

[–] takeda@lemmy.dbzer0.com 13 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I’m a software developer and I say that AI is the greatest force-multiplier that’s been introduced into the field since the compiler.

As a person who works with coworkers who fully embraced it, it doesn't look like they are any faster. There is one group that is faster, but they don't verify their code and provide burden of it on another person who reviews PR to go through their shit code (sorry, but it is unnecessarily complex, does things in weird ways, I've seen it had bugs that even canceled each other (I guess this is probably due to re-running until things work))

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] neclimdul@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (27 children)

I kind of agree it's a multiplier. But so far every time I've had it do something its written such an ugly turd I have to rewire it all taking more time than if I'd just solved the problem to start with. Maybe someday but it's not up to the quality I expect of development.

I kind of agree it’s a multiplier.

It's definitely a force multiplier, it's just that the factor after the X can be less than 1.0.

load more comments (26 replies)
[–] moustachio@lemmy.world 10 points 1 week ago (5 children)

There isn’t any credible evidence out there that actually shows LLMs are a “force multiplier.” That is almost certainly just a made up marketing term for unprofitable chatbot companies.

[–] iglou@programming.dev 8 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

If it's a tool you can use yourself and it makes you more efficient, you don't need a study to recognize its efficiency.

If you're a software engineer, just try it yourself. Your own experience is the best proof you can find to judge if a tool is useful to you or not.

[–] moustachio@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago (1 children)

I am a software engineer, and trying it is exactly how I know it is not a “force multiplier.”

Outside of my personal experience—there’s also zero actual evidence it provides anywhere near the benefits it’s marketed as.

[–] iglou@programming.dev 8 points 1 week ago

Then we have a different experience, and that's fine

[–] FaceDeer@fedia.io 7 points 1 week ago (2 children)

In this case the evidence is literally first-hand experience. There is nothing that will change my mind on this because it's my direct personal experience from actual use.

I honestly don't care what marketing says, and if other people have different experiences then that's just them. In my personal actual real-world experience I found that they let me get tons more done and their quality of work is perfectly fine as long as you're using the right tools and giving them the right instructions.

The article says that developers are disagreeing with that in situations where they are "forced" to use AI, and that's fair, it doesn't make sense to force a tool to be used for something it's not good at. They might be using it wrong. I use it whenever it's better than not using it, and that ends up being quite often in my workflow.

[–] innermachine@lemmy.world 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)

Unfortunately your being downvoted by the echo chamber participants that have to make sure you know that your opinion is wrong and theirs is better. AI is a tool, just like my impact gun. Yea there are times where you absolutely should not use an impact gun on something, but it's THE tool for some situations. And yea, using an impact gun where you should t will get you in trouble just like using AI in situations you shouldn't will get you in trouble. There is nothing new on that front!

[–] Senal@programming.dev 6 points 1 week ago

I don't disagree with the post you are responding to, almost all of that is reasonable.

Your overall argument would be more convincing if it wasn't you doing the exact same thing you are complaining about.

As for specifics , the "Just a tool" argument is meh, not all tools are equal in potential benefit and harm.

Asbestos (while it is a material) was a "tool" used to insulate from heat.

Was it good at that, sure, it probably saved many lives, was it also harmful as fuck in the medium to long term, yes it was.

It can be a useful tool and also be a detriment, those things aren't mutually exclusive.

The danger of a tool can also be mitigated with adequate safeguards that come from experience gained over time.

The argument then becomes risk vs reward, which is an entirely different conversation.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago (2 children)

using the right tools and giving them the right instructions.

The right tools is definitely key. Back an eternity ago, like October 2025, there was only Claude IMO if you wanted anything bigger than about a page of code. The others have come a long way - better than Claude was then, and I still feel like Claude is out in front, though by a less dramatic margin now.

As for "the right instructions" - I'd say it's more of "use the right process" which basically involves applying all those best practices that have developed over the past decades for human development, but we old farts from back before their time "don't need all that, it's a waste of time" because, basically, we internally practice most of the discipline without doing the documentation. With the AI tools: document your requirements, your architecture, tool choice selection process, designs, development plan, comment the code with traceability to why the code is being written, unit and integration tests, reviews, lessons learned, etc. etc. Having all that documentation kept with the project, well organized, is key to "bringing the AI agent up to speed" which you may be doing often. They really do demonstrate the eternal sunshine of the spotless mind, so if you have them take the time to write everything relevant down as they go (not just the code), then when a new one comes online it can jump into the middle of a development plan without repeating (as many) mistakes / making (as many) bad assumptions.

To be brutally honest, working with AI coding agents reminds me a LOT of working with overseas programmer consultants - if you don't get everything in writing you're gonna have a bad time.

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] lepinkainen@lemmy.world 2 points 1 week ago

There are way too many ways to use LLMs for programming to make a blanket statement

load more comments (2 replies)
[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago

In the late 1980s there was a time where we seriously weighed the option of hand assembly vs using compilers and hand assembly didn't always lose. In the early 1990s I wanted to use C++ but the available compiler for IBM compatible PCs was too buggy to be of value.

By the mid 1990s that had changed, good C compilers were exceeding all but the highest effort human assembly code - if you didn't like how it looked in assembly, you could much more easily "fix it" with a tweak to the C code instead of the assembly. I feel like we're sort of getting there with AI agent LLMs today - if you don't like what it provided, tell it why and let it try again - it's usually faster and easier and gets a better product for the time invested to use the tool instead of calling it a slop box and doing it yourself.

[–] scarabic@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

I didn’t read this as “people who like it in some situations being forced to use it in other situations,” but rather people who are against it as a whole being forced to use it at all. And yeah those folks are going to have a bad time, and won’t be in their jobs long. Just facts.

load more comments (5 replies)
[–] Treczoks@lemmy.world 8 points 1 week ago (1 children)

The main problem here are the software developers who don't notice their brain rot.

[–] MangoCats@feddit.it 2 points 1 week ago

Self awareness is all too rare.

[–] ell1e@leminal.space 3 points 1 week ago (1 children)
[–] carotte@lemmy.blahaj.zone 7 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (3 children)

isn’t it fun how every major operating system is vibe coded now

windows is an unstable mess, macos’s new ui is the most broken it’s been in decades, and linux is getting one new vulnerability per day. the future is exciting!

[–] Corkyskog@sh.itjust.works 1 points 6 days ago

It will make the cyberpunk hacking easier I guess.

[–] abstractastronaut@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

I agree with the sentiment, but to be fair, the two latest major Linux vulnerabilities have been present in the kernel since around 2017, which predates vibe coding by a couple of years.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments
view more: next ›