I don't understand the influx of these kinds of posts. I use ChatGPT and Claude daily, but I wouldn't say 90, 80, or even 50%. Not because I don't want it to be, but because it just can't.
LLMs are perfect for those who are at the beginner-level with some language, or with rather simple code that is not very business-specific, or solving/implementing tidbits that are isolated from the larger surface area of a product, or writing utility functions that do something that is well and simply defined, or the boilerplate of almost anything.
However, most of the time spent in programming is never spent on these stuff. They might constitute the largest percentage of the lines of codes written, but 90% of the time is spent on those other 10% of lines.
Give it a CSS problem like centering an object within a bit of a complex hierarchy, and it will go the rounds suggesting almost every solution that can be tried, only to loop back with the same exact confidence. I'd say, in certain cases, LLMs could be a time drain if you don't push the brakes.
The "joke" was of context and it does not belong. In fact, you attempted to express your hate AI for no valid reason. Jokes are not excuses to qualify insults which you do repeatedly. A joke does not give you a free license to post hateful comments. Also, do not expect me or anyone to click on your random link.
I don't hate AI. In fact, I use it and I'm very curious about it. I am skeptical of all the promises but I see some utility.
> Jokes are not excuses to qualify insults which you do repeatedly
Excuse me? Can you prove this?
> to post hateful comments
There is absolutely no hate in my comments.
> do not expect me or anyone to click on your random link.
I don't expect anything. You're a random person on the Internet. You do what you want. Click if you want. It will give you a little more context. Don't click if you don't want.
GitHub CoPilot just works with you instead of coming in the way. As for achieving 90%, that could happen only in an extremely verbose language with nausea inducing amounts of boilerplate code, e.g. enterprise Java, but CoPilot will chew through it.
Using CoPilot actually makes one a better programmer because you learn to always use clear variable names, without which CoPilot cannot do its job. In Python, in-line type annotations also help when defining a variable, again allowing CoPilot to provide better completions.
If you think about it, Microsoft is losing substantial amounts of money providing CoPilot. It's quite the public service.
I looked through an archive.org mirror of the link.
I do think that for achieving 90% using CoPilot, that could only ever happen in an extremely verbose language with nausea inducing amounts of boilerplate code and repetitive code, e.g. with enterprise Java with lots of non-DRY code.
LLMs are perfect for those who are at the beginner-level with some language, or with rather simple code that is not very business-specific, or solving/implementing tidbits that are isolated from the larger surface area of a product, or writing utility functions that do something that is well and simply defined, or the boilerplate of almost anything.
However, most of the time spent in programming is never spent on these stuff. They might constitute the largest percentage of the lines of codes written, but 90% of the time is spent on those other 10% of lines.
Give it a CSS problem like centering an object within a bit of a complex hierarchy, and it will go the rounds suggesting almost every solution that can be tried, only to loop back with the same exact confidence. I'd say, in certain cases, LLMs could be a time drain if you don't push the brakes.