385
AI coders think they’re 20% faster — but they’re actually 19% slower (pivot-to-ai.com)
submitted 2 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
108 comments fedilink hide all child comments

podcast version
video version

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] [email protected] 20 points 1 day ago

LLM-assisted entry-level developers merely need to be half as good as expert human unassisted developers

  1. This isn't even close to existing.
  2. The theoretical cyborg-developer at that skill level would surely be introducing horrible security bugs or brittle features that don't stand up to change
  3. Sadly i think this is exactly what many CEOs are thinking is going to happen because they've been sold on openai and anthropic lies that it's just around the corner
[-] [email protected] 7 points 1 day ago

"I'm not scared a LLM is going to be able to replace me. I'm scared that CEO are going to think that"

[-] [email protected] 5 points 1 day ago

AI->cocaine filter: Cocaine isn’t going to replace you. Someone using cocaine is going to replace you.

[-] [email protected] 2 points 1 day ago

Point 3. is what I’m getting at. They desperately want to unload expensive developers, so bad. They’ll try it, and keep trying it, even as products suffer, in the hopes of driving down labor costs.

this post was submitted on 11 Jul 2025
385 points (100.0% liked)

TechTakes

2060 readers
288 users here now

Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.

This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.

For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
[email protected]