57
submitted 3 days ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]
all 21 comments
sorted by: hot top new old
[-] [email protected] 52 points 3 days ago

Looking through the commit history there are numerous "Manually fixed..." commits, where the LLM doesn't do what the programmer wants after repeated prompting, so they fix it themself.

And here is the problem. It required expert supervision for the prompts to be repeatedly refined, and the code manually fixed, until the code was correct. This doesn't save any labour, it just changes the nature of programming into code review.

If this programmer wasn't already an expert in this problem domain then I have no doubt that this component would be full of bugs and security issues.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

Quoting from the repo:

This library (including the schema documentation) was largely written with the help of Claude, the AI model by Anthropic. Claude's output was thoroughly reviewed by Cloudflare engineers with careful attention paid to security and compliance with standards. Many improvements were made on the initial output, mostly again by prompting Claude (and reviewing the results). Check out the commit history to see how Claude was prompted and what code it produced.

"NOOOOOOOO!!!! You can't just use an LLM to write an auth library!"

"haha gpus go brrr"

In all seriousness, two months ago (January 2025), I (@kentonv) would have agreed. I was an AI skeptic. I thoughts LLMs were glorified Markov chain generators that didn't actually understand code and couldn't produce anything novel. I started this project on a lark, fully expecting the AI to produce terrible code for me to laugh at. And then, uh... the code actually looked pretty good. Not perfect, but I just told the AI to fix things, and it did. I was shocked.

To emphasize, this is not "vibe coded". Every line was thoroughly reviewed and cross-referenced with relevant RFCs, by security experts with previous experience with those RFCs. I was trying to validate my skepticism. I ended up proving myself wrong.

Again, please check out the commit history -- especially early commits -- to understand how this went.

[-] [email protected] 8 points 3 days ago

That perfectly mirrors my AI journey. I was very skeptical and my early tests showed shit results. But these days AI can indeed produce working code. But you still need experience to spot errors and to understand how to tell the AI what to fix and how.

[-] [email protected] -1 points 3 days ago

Agreed. It creates a new normal for what the engineer needs to actually know. In another comment I claimed that the same was true at the advent of stack overflow

[-] [email protected] 0 points 3 days ago

I agree with that. It is a bit like SO on steroids, because you can even skip the copy&paste part. And we've been making fun of people who do that without understand the code for many years. I think with AI this will simply continue. There is the situation of junior devs, which I am kind of worried about. But I think in the end it'll be fine. We've always had a smaller percentage of people who really know stuff and a larger group who just writes code.

[-] [email protected] 30 points 3 days ago

This seems like a perfectly reasonable experiment and not something they’re going to release without extensive human and security review.

Oauth libraries aren’t new and A.I. can probably generate adequate code. My main problem with A.I. for this purpose is that senior developers/experts don’t pop out of thin air. You need junior developers now if you want any real experts in the future. Maybe you need fewer and more specialized training. Maybe the goal is to offload the training cost to Universities and tech companies only want PhDs. Maybe someday LLMs will be good enough to not need much supervision. But that’s not where we are.

We probably need a Level x capability scale like self-driving cars for this sort of thing.

[-] [email protected] 9 points 3 days ago

If you read the commentary on the process you notice heavy reliance on experts in the field to ensure the code is good and secure. Claude is great at pumping out code, but it can really get confused and forget/omit earlier work, for example.

I think the notion of junior developers disappearing because of AI is false. These tools accelerate productivity, they don't replace human experience.

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

I think the notion of junior developers disappearing because of AI is false.

This is true, because AI is not the actual issue. The issue, like with most, is humanity; our perception and trust of AI. Regardless of logic, humanity still chooses illogical decisions.

[-] [email protected] 4 points 3 days ago

Doctors face a similar obstacle before they can practice: medical school and residency. They literally have to jump from zero to hero before the first real paycheck.

Things may evolve this way for senior software developers with a high rate of dropout.

this post was submitted on 03 Jun 2025
57 points (86.1% liked)

Technology

70847 readers
5911 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