Just want to clarify, this is not my Substack, I’m just sharing this because I found it insightful.

The author describes himself as a “fractional CTO”(no clue what that means, don’t ask me) and advisor. His clients asked him how they could leverage AI. He decided to experience it for himself. From the author(emphasis mine):

I forced myself to use Claude Code exclusively to build a product. Three months. Not a single line of code written by me. I wanted to experience what my clients were considering—100% AI adoption. I needed to know firsthand why that 95% failure rate exists.

I got the product launched. It worked. I was proud of what I’d created. Then came the moment that validated every concern in that MIT study: I needed to make a small change and realized I wasn’t confident I could do it. My own product, built under my direction, and I’d lost confidence in my ability to modify it.

Now when clients ask me about AI adoption, I can tell them exactly what 100% looks like: it looks like failure. Not immediate failure—that’s the trap. Initial metrics look great. You ship faster. You feel productive. Then three months later, you realize nobody actually understands what you’ve built.

  • funkless_eck@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    18
    ·
    21 hours ago

    I mean I was trying to solve a problem t’other day (hobbyist) - it told me to create a

    function foo(bar): await object.foo(bar)

    then in object

    function foo(bar): _foo(bar)

    function _foo(bar): original_object.foo(bar)

    like literally passing a variable between three wrapper functions in two objects that did nothing except pass the variable back to the original function in an infinite loop

    add some layers and complexity and it’d be very easy to get lost

    • theparadox@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      19 hours ago

      The few times I’ve used LLMs for coding help, usually because I’m curious if they’ve gotten better, they let me down. Last time it was insistent that its solution would work as expected. When I gave it an example that wouldn’t work, it even broke down each step of the function giving me the value of its variables at each step to demonstrate that it worked… but at the step where it had fucked up, it swapped the value in the variable to one that would make the final answer correct. It made me wonder how much water and energy it cost me to be gaslit into a bad solution.

      How do people vibe code with this shit?

    • vpol@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      13 hours ago

      As a learning process it’s absolutely fine.

      You make a mess, you suffer, you debug, you learn.

      But you don’t call yourself a developer (at least I hope) on your CV.