So im having a “issue” that might not be an issue? Ill explain.

Most of work is going full AI. We have around 20 developers. Its about 3/4 that are using AI to do ALL the work with Claude. Earlier in the year, everyone got a ton of AI credits and the amount of “Finished” products have popped out in mass. The amount of projects we have had is skyrocketing.

Now for the problem. Half the projects have terrible bugs. Pages that go no where, bugs that are VERY hard to find in the code (because its filled with code smells). And sometimes the site/program/etc… will just stop working for no reason because they decided to use some old version of react instead of anything modern. Because AI.

Even the ones that work will often be very difficult to debug if its just something the AI did or something the user did.

So a LOT of AI projects are getting abandoned…for more AI remake projects. I cant even call it iterations because no one learned anything making the last project.

Now once in a while I do use AI. It was part of my research back almost 20 years ago. But its mostly for one offs like creating a command line argument in python or give the the reference page for xyz feature. But I dont have it write the entire codebase for me. Seems like a recipe for disaster. And ive seen it bork a couple of peoples machines before.

I dunno am I the old man yells at clouds now?

  • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    19 hours ago

    Its pretty good at SQL

    Eh 🤷‍♂️. Call it anecdotal if you want, but this is my experience:

    The imbeciles who manage our ERP silently pushed some update that must have removed some indexes because suddenly several complex queries were one or two orders of magnitude slower.

    While I got to work on optimizing them, a colleague who’s outsourced most of his thinking to LLMs got what according to him was “the most powerful model” (some flavour of claude, I assume) to take a look at one particular affected query relevant to the project he was working on.

    To be fair it went for more or less the same approach I was taking (storing intermediate results in table variables, spending memory to save speed, though it used temporary tables instead for some reason), but in a significantly more inelegant and inefficient way than I would have (for instance, it put SELECT *s — from tables with hundreds of columns! — into the temporary tables, when we only needed a few columns; an absurd waste of memory; it also missed several other optimizations, being apparently happy with “good enough” instead of trying to be thorough).

    Happy with the result he pushed it into production, while I kept working on the rest of the queries, managing to also bring them back to reasonable times.

    Couple days later, ticket comes in about that specific query being slow again, for particular parameters. I’m not sure what was wrong (the design of the database is absolute unadulterated shit, but it belongs to the ERP anthropoids and we can look but not touch, and have to work around it), but in some specific cases some joins produced many duplicate results, leading to massive slowdowns. While diagnosing that I also noticed that some of the values it produced weren’t correct.

    So I rewrote the whole thing based on the work I’d done with the other queries, and now it works properly and efficiently, and significantly faster (at least until the ERP assholes break something again).

    TL;DR, sure, the machine quickly produced an apparently working solution (I don’t know what the cost of the tokens was, though), in much less time than I could, but the result was ugly, poorly thought out (which, I mean, since it was made by something that can’t think and just statistically processes language, I’m not sure to which extent can be a criticism of the technology, but is a criticism of those using it), less efficient than mine (and I wouldn’t call myself any kind of SQL master or guru, I just meddle), and failed in some particular cases. I was not impressed.

      • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        9 hours ago

        Didn’t catch the cases in which it failed.

        And the ERP troglodytes don’t seem to have tests, no. Obviously not for our stuff (unless they’re testing to make sure it breaks), and it certainly doesn’t look like they do any kind of testing for theirs either.

          • leftzero@lemmy.dbzer0.com
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            8 hours ago

            Thanks.

            Hope is at some point they’ll break something important enough that the boss will consider that it’s costlier to keep doing business with them than to migrate everything. 🤷‍♂️

            Meanwhile we’re porting as much as we can to in-house solutions. Trying to minimise the amount of work needed to transition away from them.