I could use AI to edit my podcasts. As well as the ethics, the reason I don't is because it wouldn't save me any time. I'd still have to go through and check everything, and fix the small mistakes it made.
People who say AI saves them time at work (coding for example) must not be thoroughly checking the output and fixing the small mistakes. Or maybe I'm missing something here. 🤷‍♂️
@joeress You’re not missing anything.
I’ve used Claude professionally since about Oct last. I’ve manually written very little code since.
But I spend an inordinate amount of my time reviewing the output and issuing more prompts to fix things, and then reviewing again.
I was impressed at the start, but now I view it as a random bug generator. And it’s making me lazy as a coder.
So where’s the upside? I’m not sure there is one :-)
@t3rcermillenium @joeress I have a very similar experience. As is typical, I recently used it to write a simple use case of C++ 17s recursive_directory_iterator. After a little testing I discovered it crashes if it runs across a directory it doesn't have permission to open, a very normal use case. That's great behavior for a backup utility. After an updated prompt it crashed on undefined behavior using an invalidated iterator...
Fortunately I only use it to make fun of it, not professionally. I always think about how many people use output without the level of checking we are doing and that scares the crap out of me.
@kookjr @joeress This rings so true.
The code it generates looks good, has most of the edge cases covered, but not all edge cases.
It’s like “where’s Wally” trying to find the missing edge cases in the generated code.
At least when I’m coding, I’m thinking about the edge cases. So I still have to think about the edge cases, but now I also have to find the ones missing in the code.
Crazy!
Joe Ressington
T3rc
Mat Cucuzella