Re:AI Was Supposed to Help Juniors Shine. Why Does It Mostly...
by bigfishrunning on Sunday September 21, 2025 @12:43PM
(#45324339)
Except that most of the code seniors review was written with intention, not just the most statistically most likely response to a given query. As a senior engineer, the kinds of mistakes that AI makes are much more bizarre then the mistakes junior engineers make
[ Parent
| on HN ]
Re:AI Was Supposed to Help Juniors Shine. Why Does It Mostly...
by TeMPOraL on Sunday September 21, 2025 @03:30PM
(#45325884)
> Except that most of the code seniors review was written with intention, not just the most statistically most likely response to a given query.
Given the nature of the statistics in question, the line between the two is extremely blurry at this point.
Re:AI Was Supposed to Help Juniors Shine. Why Does It Mostly...
by square_usual on Sunday September 21, 2025 @12:48PM
(#45324396)
I've worked with many interns and juniors in my life and they've made very bizarre mistakes and had subtle bugs, so the difference in the kinds hasn't made much of a difference in the work I've had to do to review. Whether or not there was intention behind it didn't make a difference.
Re:AI Was Supposed to Help Juniors Shine. Why Does It Mostly...
by sokoloff on Sunday September 21, 2025 @02:06PM
(#45325143)
I’ve definitely seen absolutely bizarre creations from junior devs decades ago (so, well before modern AI). I can also think back to some cringey code I wrote by hand when I was a junior as well.
I mentor high-school students and watch them live write code that takes a completely bizarre path. It might technically be intentional, but that doesn’t mean it’s good or useful.
Re:AI Was Supposed to Help Juniors Shine. Why Does It Mostly...
by itsoktocry on Sunday September 21, 2025 @05:09PM
(#45326664)
>not just the most statistically most likely response to a given query.
Some people really are going to hang on until the better end (and beyond) eh?
"AI can't code like me!" people are going to get crushed.