515
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 29 Oct 2026
515 points (99.0% liked)
Technology
89155 readers
4275 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
I'd say not only labelled, but at the very least if we ain't ostracizing generative ai being used in any part of the process, we should at least have the dignity to have it quarantined. I for one don't feel like buying and installing malware because a yahoo who cannot actually read their own code decides to upload to Steam, let alone literally any other platform.
What about experienced developers who use AI, do they still count as a yahoo who cannot actually read their own code?
I think it's a difficult situation because a programmer that has been making software before AI was even a thing is not the same as a vibecoder that doesn't know what a variable is.
Depends. If they continue to use it on a regular basis, I give them a couple months before their ability starts to decline and theb apply yahoo to them. Otherwise if it's more of a one off thing, I still personally do not trust the code but wouldn't call them a yahoo yet.
Is the programmer reviewing the code ai shits out or blindly trusting it?
You're already using an operating system where generative AI was being used in some parts of the process and creative tools have had generative AI functions since even before the LLM craze.
If we are talking autocomplete for IDEs, not generative AI. Also, a lot of the predictive code lines thing are just based off of what's most likely to come next, as ( most likely ) trained off of others work. Whereas I'd argue that is different enough from an LLM since it's basically the IDE version of the autocomplete on your smart phones keyboard app ( if you keep it on ). For LLMs, I would argue that they generate generic code that majority of the time needs cleaned up in order to even function since it will often, especially from back before I ditched it, look at your request saying you are using a specific language version and disregard because it thinks it can just use any code from that language and it'll work. Don't even get me started on how generative AI companies purposefully make their "software" write code in a way that is extremely bloated snd could easily be cut down to a couple lines just so they can say how their AI ( emphasis on artificial ) can write more code faster.
If we're talking filters on art programs like Krita, also historically not completely generative AI. Majority of them ( at least on Krita ) rely on transforming your art by whatever the code says it should do as compared to generating a new image/texture. No prompt nor a need to mass steal art online in order for these filters to work. As for even something like an autofill colourize mask thing, that relies more on some form of gap detection, which isn't considered generative AI, AFAIK. Just an advanced bucket fill tool.
If we're talking things like ESRGAN, sure, and I absolutely have problems with that as well, but they're ever so slightly lesser versions of the problems I have with LLMs and such.
I am well aware that some forms of it have existed for long before LLMs, but they were much more tame and weren't being used to destroy the internet and planet to the degree it's being used now.