But also overestimating what AI can do. Don't get me wrong, I have a full setup for AI and it crates 100% of code, but I have to correct it constantly.
The important thing is knowing where AI excels and where it is iffy. AI is best at deterministic things when it can self correct its course. That's why it is great at math, their biggest expieriments with AI without human are kernels (a lot of tests, AI self corrects until everything is green), the same comes for mods. But it starts doing more or less stupid things randomly if it has no chance of verifying itself - architecture decision, business logic etc.
Literally everything. I'm a staff engineer. It does all of my code. Frontend, backend, opengl/directx, the works.
They do not understand what a good solution to a problem actually is or how to implement it in a way that follows good code quality standards. They do the minimal amount of work possible, meaning they hack shit together. It may function, but it will be difficult to extend, lead to more bugs in the future, and waste more time in the future because it has to fight its own slop.
Exactly that. I am principal developer and have the same thing. It can do working thing, but it doesn't mean it is good quality solution and that's what some people do not get
Right, that's why you spend 95% of the time on iterating on the contracts and design docs over, and over, and over again. And then in the very end, you can generally handhold it for a bit while creating the core structure, and let it loose over night with a clear end condition and adversarial review.
People are acting as if creating code with AI just means "Claude build me a mod, masterpiece, make no mistakes" and waiting a bit. I'm currently building a new OpenTofu AWS SDN module stack for my company and have spent 4 days so far doing nothing but discuss the constraints and APIs with Claude, zero actual code written.
Still, this would be a project for 6-12 months without AI, and in the end I'd still have numerous bugs, loose ends, slightly outdated docs, wonky model shapes etc. because finding these reliably is tremendously difficult for a human, while AI can simply keep entire libraries in mind at once.
It's probably because most people have only played with image creation, which actually is that straightforward (unless you really get into it with ComfyUI, but still orders of magnitudes easier).
You are the first person I've ever spoken to who has claimed to have an agent that doesn't produce bad code when undirected. Out of every person I interact with at work and online. So apologies if I don't believe you, haha
Yes, I use Opus 5.5, Fable, everything. It is good for things I listed and for most greenfield / less complex things. I think you talk about AI factories, it works too. But not everywhere it is possible. Claude Code has a lot of bugfixes in changelog and they get self healing bugs only because AI in Claude Code sees it and reports it automatically. But it is not the case in other, more complex projects
That's the issue - the AI is super good until some point and given certain constraints and sometimes needs feedback with bugs reported first to be picked up and fixed automatically. I work in enterprise project and it is not possible to do it here without AI lowering the standards
33
u/BabylonianWeeb 11h ago edited 11h ago
People underestimate how hard coding is, especially for porting console games to PC. It takes a couple of years without AI vs a few months with AI.