144
Microsoft's distinguished engineer says "typing code is absolutely over," and Windows 11 is already being built that way. Nadella previously said 20-30% code at MSFT is AI-coded, and Windows security… (www.windowslatest.com)
submitted 2 months ago by to c/pcmasterrace@lemmy.world
62 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

Full title: Microsoft's distinguished engineer says "typing code is absolutely over," and Windows 11 is already being built that way. Nadella previously said 20-30% code at MSFT is AI-coded, and Windows security updates now include AI-assisted fixes to fight AI-enabled threats.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -14 points 2 months ago* (12 children)

Hard agree with him now. I'm running multiple opus agents in parallel with occasional fable reviews and plans. I review and correct and guide but I could never come close to this level of real productivity without it.

The abstraction level has risen up to interfaces and architecture and I'm good at both.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • hideshow 12 child comments
    •
  • [–] 13 points 2 months ago (6 children)

    Idk how people can type this shit out and not feel disgusting.

    Productivity for what. You've outsourced your thinking to the gambling prompt machine. Yikes.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    I see that this is an unpopular opinion and I'm fine with that.

    Our job is not to write code. Our job is to transform data.

    We don't stop thinking. We just think more strategically and focus on data models and isolating architectural interfaces.

    Changing what you think about is not the same as stopping thinking.

    The code details are not the hard part for an architect anyways. Isolating code to separate concerns and minimize complexity to ensure sustainable development velocity is the challenge.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago* (4 children)

    Doesn't look like it. Outsourcing thinking is one thing: "hey, ai, implement this feature, no mistakes --> straight to production", outsourcing writing code is another thing: "hey, ai, write such and such code --> review --> this is not needed, that should be done this way --> rinse and repeat, then testing, and only then production"

    Edit: problem is, I have no sensible ground to believe enough people at microslop do the latter. Nor am I optimistic about this percentage in general, including people of other professions

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 7 points 2 months ago (3 children)

    AI is absolutely outsourcing whatever part of your thinking you assign it to. That's exactly why studies have already shown multiple times that AI use is associated with skill atrophy.

    It's not permanent, but we can't keep ignoring it.

    https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC11239631/

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
    •
  • [–] -2 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    We are talking different languages here. You: "if you let AI do your thinking for you, your ability will decrease". True, of course. Me: "you can use AI to help without outsourcing actual thinking process to it". Also true. And of course it is true that too many people are taking the shortcut and this should be addressed

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
    •
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (1 child)

    Except what is the functional difference? Please elaborate.

    You still interact with LLMs the same exact way, you are still prompting, waiting for a result, then getting dopamine when it's right, and then prompting again when it's wrong.

    That's literally the same loop gambling uses, and then the AI will stack on "great job, you're so fucking smart and handsome".

    People stop thinking, and use AI. It feels like a friend, like a colleague, like it was trained on the most persuasive writing in human history and thent it blows that smoke up your ass.

    As AIs are designed now, literally no one is immune from the psychosis, the yes man syndrome, or just being human(lazy) and letting the AI do it.

    You cannot trust people to think for themselves, we already have issues with that and now we distributed chatbots to everyone so learning is even less necessary.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    You cannot trust people to think for themselves, we already have issues with that and now we distributed chatbots to everyone so learning is even less necessary.

    True that. No question here

    Except what is the functional difference? Please elaborate.

    I am not "getting dopamine when it’s right, and then prompting again when it’s wrong", I am just offloading the work of typing the text. What the code should do, how it should do it, how much effort to spend on processing this or that edge case/possible problem - still all me. Another version of the same: I don't care that an llm also writes tests and they are green: who cares if they are green when the core logic can be still all fucked up

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Did you ever think that maybe opus is producing rubbish that nobody wants to read, and you are tempted at accept it for the sake of "productivity"?

    If some piece of training data worked around some problem in an old dependency, well now all the generated code is going to build in that same workaround and write out comments explaining it whether it applies anymore or not. Its like superstition coding, and eliminates the possibility of creating optimized code for what you need without overly defensive or complex implementation, and against the current state of your dependencies. The opus code might come faster, and it might work, but the only way to review and maintain it is going to be opus or the next model. I'm not criticizing you, were all being pushed into using it this way, but a part of the creativity is gone and ceded to ai companies

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] 1 point 1 month ago

    I pay pretty good attention to data models and isolating interfaces. I don't pay as much attention now to leaf code. Sections which can be written and then rewritten quickly by ai.

    Opus is almost as good as me tactically when it has context and fable is as good but way faster.

    They both lack sufficient long term architectural context but I provide that for them.

    I don't vibe code.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 6 points 2 months ago* (1 child)

    they cant change fundametals - device working against me is not MY device.
    which is why - doesnt matter if they rewrite everyting in rust, it wont sell.
    people know nowadays

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •