Yes, Europe is not as relevant in the unhealthy toy business as the US, which is a good thing.

And that's what they dared to show to the public. I shudder thinking about the state of their code...

You're holding the LLM wrong.

It's about as easy to hold as an old foam mattress

> The AI rip-off was not just ugly. It was careless, blatantly amateuristic, and lacking any ambition, to put it gently. Microsoft unworthy.

LOL, I disagree. It's very on brand for Microslop.

It's like some companies with huge interests are spreading FOMO, isn't it?

What that model is going to do in 2 years is replace tech debt with more complicated tech debt.

One could argue that's a cynically accurate definition of most iterative development anyway.

But I don't know that I accept the core assertion. If the engineer is screening the output and using the LLM to generate tests, chances are pretty good it's not going to be worse than human-generated tech debt. If there's more accumulated, it's because there's more output in general.

Only if you accept the premise that the code generated by LLMs is identical to the developer's output in quality, just higher in volume. In my lived professional experience, that's not the case.

It seems to me that prompting agents and reviewing the output just doesn't.... trigger the same neural pathways for people? I constantly see people submit agent generated code with mistakes they would have never made themselves when "handwriting" code.

Until now, the average PR had one author and a couple reviewers. From now on, most PRs will have no authors and only reviewers. We simply have no data about how this will impact both code quality AND people's cognitive abilities over time. If my intuition is correct, it will affect both negatively over time. It remains to be seen. It's definitely not something that the AI hyperenthusiasts think at all about.

> In my lived professional experience, that's not the case.

In mine it is the case. Anecdata.

But for me, this was over two decades in an underpaid job at an S&P500 writing government software, so maybe you had better peers.

I stated plainly: "we have no data about this". Vibes is all we have.

It's not just me though. Loads of people subjectively perceiving a decrease in quality of engineering when relying on agents. You'll find thousands of examples on this site alone.

I have yet to find an agent that writes as succinctly as I do. That said, I have found agents more than capable of doing something.

And these are the blunders we see. I shudder thinking about all the blunders that happily pass under our collective noses because we're not experts in the field...

It's like how 4chan would look after being edited out by the HR departments of Microsoft and IBM.

That would happen if the AI were good and consistent at doing the mechanical part. Which it is, sometimes.

I've found it's better to have the bot write a program to do the mechanical part that trusting it not to have a lazy day.

It would be way smaller and with real content, instead of crappy slop (AI or otherwise).

It would be dead. Google would shut it down or sell it, but who is going to buy billions of dollars a year in costs for no advertising revenue in return? Youtube's hosting costs would put a massive dent in even some hypothetical really nice billionaire's wallet. Apple could afford it and they'd run it a million times better, but would they even consider putting so much loss on their books for the sake of ... PR?

A subscription based YouTube dead? That makes no sense. And a YouTube without terabytes of slop would be way easier to maintain.

What percentage of YouTube's revenue do you think is from subs?

The slop is already there. Even without the slop, which it would be borderline impossible to identify en masse, the hosting costs are still astronomical. I appreciate your idealism, but Youtube without advertising revenue would be a financial black hole, and even if it survived, creators would simply be the ones taking the hit

Unless you're suggesting Youtube would just start again from zero, in which case it would just fail and it might as well be the same as dying