AI promised efficiency. Instead, it's making us work harder

Re:AI promised efficiency. Instead, it's making us work harder by f1shy on Monday August 04, 2025 @12:59PM (#44788517)

This is exactly how I see it. Is not about the tool, is how it is used. In 1990 that would have been “IDK I got it from a BBS” and in 1980 “got if from a magazine“. It doesn’t matter how you get there, you have to understand it. BTW I had a similar problem as I was manager in HW development, where the value of a resistor had no documented calculation. I would ask: where does it came from? If the answer was “I tried and it worked”, or “tested in lab until I found it” or in the 2000 “I run many simulations and was the best value” I would reject and ask for proper calculations, with WCA.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AI promised efficiency. Instead, it's making us work harder by Andrex on Monday August 04, 2025 @01:03PM (#44788568)

As vibe coding becomes more commonplace you'll see these historical safeguards erode. That is the danger IMO.

You're right, saying you got something off SO would get you laughed out of programming circles back in the day. We should be applying the same shame to people who vibe code, not encourage it, if we want human-parseable and maintainable software.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AI promised efficiency. Instead, it's making us work harder by vkou on Monday August 04, 2025 @01:12PM (#44788698)

> That is the danger IMO.

For whom is this a danger for?

If we're paid to dig ditches and fill them, who are we to question our supreme leaders? They control the purse strings, so of course they know best.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:AI promised efficiency. Instead, it's making us work harder by nemesisithetic on Tuesday August 05, 2025 @04:01AM (#44795441)

> If we're paid to dig ditches and fill them

This is a very cruel punishment sometimes used in forced labor camps. You are describing torture.

[ Parent | on HN ]