points by bigfishrunning 1 day ago | 0 comments
So those goals and timelines should be reconsidered; If a civil engineering firm slapped up a bridge as quickly and cheaply as possible with no concern for quality, they would cease to exist. We have no standards for software quality, and therefore anything that accelerated the perceived output is enthusiastically adopted without consideration for any future consequences.
Weinberg’s Law -- If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker that came along would destroy civilization.
[–] nemo44x 1 day ago
We actually do have standards for some software engineering. Claude isn’t writing anything that is life/death critical.
Static analysis for example. Although I’ve heard that LLMs can now do that if a user wanted it.
[–] bigfishrunning 18 hours ago
I assume the standards you're referring to are things like The MISRA guidelines, or the IEC standards (specifically 62304). In my experience, these are applied in very "check-the-box" ways that often undermine their intent; Very very few organizations take software safety seriously.
[–] bethekidyouwant 1 day ago
All analogies are bad you can’t push reboot on a building (yes this analogy is also bad)
[–] bigfishrunning 18 hours ago
We shouldn't have to "push reboot" on systems we rely on. The fact that that's acceptable is a big part of the problem.
[–] bethekidyouwant 8 hours ago
Again analogies are bad. It takes a minute to reboot so you you can rely on “it”
[–] Robotbeat 1 day ago
Imagine a civil engineer that refuses to use a computer of any kind for his work. How much do you trust scribbled long division?
Edit: what about a civil engineer that refuses to use steel. Or Arabic numerals. Or a construction worker that refuses to use power equipment. A delivery man who swears off wheels.
[–] JsonDemWitOster 1 day ago
mattw2121's hypothetical is about timelines and quality. As long as said Civil Engineer can deliver quality work within our allocated timeline, he can do long division in binary scribbled in sand for all I care.
[–] rsiotednoirstdn 1 day ago
Another moron with AI Delusion Syndrome.
Comparing LLMs to steel, numbers, and wheels is fucking hilarious.
Yes, power equipment is better, but still barely the same thing.
You're one dumb motherfucker, aren't you?
Big tech want to tell us that AI is great because it can write code faster than what a human can, the problem is that code is shit, is full of bugs, and is not maintainable.
Reason why my company decided to stop using AI for code that gets delivered to customers, the customer find bugs, he is not happy, you have to use time to fix bugs (for free, because it's under warranty), so we waste time, and produce code that is not easy to evolve. And even if AI is faster to write code, developers are less motivated to work, so they will just waste time on the internet while being focused on the task, and thus again, there is really no save of money.
To me all of this doesn't make sense, we want to use AI to make the work instead of US, but even if we achieve in that the result of it gives benefits only to an handful of people that are already too much rich, while the world gets polluted with all the CO2 that is produced by AI tokens, people looses jobs and gets poorer. This idea to me needs to be opposed.