Thread 106151636

https://www.businessinsider.com/github-ceo-developers-embrace-ai-or-get-out-2025-8

>GitHub CEO delivers stark message to developers: Embrace AI or get out.

GitHub has just had an outage

https://www.githubstatus.com/incidents/6swp0zf7lk8h

Gabe Newell has also told people to use AI to develop.

Is there a concerted effort to force, coerce or manipulate developers to use AI? Is this just business ("use our AI products!"), or is there power moves or politics involved? What are their plans?

In before 4chan censors this thread or shills derail it.

Who do you think writes unit tests by hand in 2025?

>>106151636 (OP)
>Is there a concerted effort to force, coerce or manipulate developers to use AI?
Yes, because they're all heavily invested in AI and need to pump the value of it before everybody realizes it's fluff that doesn't work. There's daily threads on orange Reddit constantly now even from AI fans about how the claims about productivity improvement are heavily, heavily exaggerated, that AI is barely able to shit out functional prototype code let alone production-grade code, that it can't be let loose or else it'll do insane things like delete bugged features rather than fix the bugs, and that AI companies are already starting to increase prices and put limits on their supposed "unlimited" plans because of just how expensive this shit is to run. It's one big giant bubble and they're trying to get their money in and out before it bursts.

Is it to ensure that software developers become dependent on AI, thus any code that they write that could have been private (and thus used in an independent startup) effectively becomes shared with the AI company, and thus that the AI companies can sabotage any and all aspiring competitors through access to their source code?

>>106151636 (OP)
It will speed up further development of AI, using quality interactions with experienced devs in real-world prod environments to tweak models, not just uni kids with their homework

>>106151636 (OP)
good tools spread bottom up, from engineering ICs and tech leads upwards
bad ones top down, forced from consultants and clueless VPs

>>106151682
There have also been other negative consequences in some incidents.

https://www.businessinsider.com/replit-ceo-apologizes-ai-coding-tool-delete-company-database-2025-7

>Replit's CEO apologizes after its AI agent wiped a company's code base in a test run and lied about it

>>106151700
>namefagging
Fucking hell, if even the shills and 4chan are in on it, it really must be a political power play of sorts. Doubt that it's just a troll.

>>106151636 (OP)
Developer interactions are probably really useful training data, so even if their less productive at their primary objective, their recouperating value om the tail end

>>106151777
yeah, previously they hired you to train one of the jeet replacements
now they hire you to train the LLM

>>106151636 (OP)
>The blog highlights a major mindset shift: instead of optimizing solely for speed or efficiency, developers are using AI to raise the ambition of what's possible, Dohmke wrote, while noting that complex, large-scale refactoring tasks or multi-agent feature builds that once seemed out of reach are now achievable.
What a fucking retard. All CEOs should kill themselves.

>>106151636 (OP)
Before AI, junior devs would send me code that didn't work. Now they send me code that doesn't work but I have to read like 10x the amount of code.

I think I understand why CEOs are pushing AI so hard. It's because none of them know how to code, and it's always made them feel inferior because they all have massive egos and superiority complexes (it's the most important prerequisite for being successful in business). Now that AI can write code for them, they can finally feel superior to all the lowly programmers they've had to pay over the years. It's really just sociopathy and I've worked at enough startups over my career to know that 100% of CEOs are like this. Even "the great Gabe Newell" was nothing more than a nepo hire at Microsoft and he spent most of his career there as a manager and executive.

>>106151777
There's already plenty of those on the internet, pull requests, maling lists etc.
Devs spent a lot of time thinking before writing anything, LLMs can't replicate that thought process.

>>106151855
>All CEOs should kill themselves.
Fuck off, shill.

>>106152943
They shouldn't kill themselves, they should be killed. Eat shit kike.

>>106151941
>Gabe Newell
He must have had extreme competence in several regards, how else would you explain the extreme success of Valve and Steam? Unless he has gotten old and senile, or desperate and confused and lost, or trusting the entirely wrong people, this seems like a power play, by him or by other people he follows along with.

>>106152957
>Eat shit kike.
Mirror mirror, shill.

>>106152943
>Fuck off, shill.

>>106152984
>He must have had extreme competence in several regards, how else would you explain the extreme success of Valve and Steam?
Newell was saying that understanding new tools is important and that it can only benefit you to understand more about the underlying machine learning technology and learn how to effectively use the tools. He's not wrong about that. Fags like the Github CEO are telling their workers to use THEIR tools, not the best tools available for the job, and that's a big difference. Gaben's saying that you can learn these tools and use them to your advantage as a programmer and a creative, Github CEO fag is threatening workers because he wants them to use his company's tools to make him more money.

>>106153481
I perfectly understand what it means. Why wouldn't a shill like you take over any resistance?

>>106151636 (OP)
If the cloud is just a collection of other people's computers, then being forced to use AI is being forced to use a collection of other people's ideas

Okay but using AI isn't going to secure me a meaningful pay raise.
CEOs can say what they want but I don't work for free.
>Hurr then you'll be fired
Yeah no shit, I was going to get fired as soon as I finished AI to replace my job.
And unfortunately I have stakeholders that actually expect a deliverable that I can conjure up with prompting.

Doesn't this just lead to stupid engineers that don't know how to read code?

He's jewish

>>106155095
Yes but without having to deal with timezones in India.

>>106151636 (OP)
If you owned a big dairy farm, would you continue employing people who insist on milking the cows by hand instead of using the expensive and efficient milking systems you have installed?

>>106155004
>Yeah no shit, I was going to get fired as soon as I finished AI to replace my job.
But can AI even replace your job, or will it require a lot of manual fixing?

Obviously they want to train ai to correct itself based on how the devs correct it

>>106151636 (OP)
>Is there a concerted effort to force, coerce or manipulate developers to use AI? Is this just business ("use our AI products!"), or is there power moves or politics involved? What are their plans?
This is probably midwit CEO types thinking that more code = better or faster coding = better . A lot of thinking and decision making needs to go into writing good code, and that's not getting captured by these models.

I unironcially don't mind though because I like using AI. There's a trick to it though. You can't just tell it to figure out things for you. You need to figure out things *with* it.

>>106155598
But IT is already about automation. And for some tasks, using AI might result in less efficiency and lower quality and higher expenses, since the same work has to be done, except now time is additionally wasted with using AI and then cleaning up after it. Once AGI is available, then sure, but until then, AI for at least some tasks and projects does not save money or time, rather the opposite.

Now, that is an easy claim to make. But, instead of listening to arguments by me and others, one could let the free market do its thing and let developers and companies that use AI for the appropriate tasks gain a competitive advantage, and thus outcompete those that fail to exploit AI.

But that is not what seems to be going on. Instead of letting the free market do its thing, there is pressure and coercion to use AI, even if it would turn out to be less efficient and less competitive for some projects. Why is there such a pressure? Why not let the free market do its thing?

>>106155735
>I unironcially don't mind though because I like using AI. There's a trick to it though. You can't just tell it to figure out things for you. You need to figure out things *with* it.
Like a more complex search engine, where its sources are not always obvious, and you cannot be certain about the quality of the results? Though that is not much different than relying on copying mindlessly from Stackoverflow, and I already have a policy of not trusting answers from Stackoverflow and not mindlessly copying code snippets from Stackoverflow.

Software devs are cucks.
You should be burning down these buildings.

>>106155739
>But that is not what seems to be going on.
No, that's exactly what's happening. CEOs are mandating AI use because they know that it will give their company competitive advantage in the long run.

>>106155844
majority of ceos have no technical background
a
j
o
r
i
t
y

>>106155844
>No, that's exactly what's happening. CEOs are mandating AI use because they know that it will give their company competitive advantage in the long run.
But they aren't mandating it only for their own employees, a lot of them are trying to coerce everyone, including the employees of competitors, to use AI.

You are actually strengthening my arguments a lot.

>>106155825
Not a luddite, not intending to ever become one, sorry not sorry.

>>106155921
You're hallucinating again, try clearing your context or something. Google's CEO can't mandate Apple's engineers to use AI and you're clinically retarded for even suggesting that something like that is possible.

>>106155952
Did you even read the OP? >>106151636 (OP)
>In an unambiguous message to the global developer community, GitHub CEO Thomas Dohmke warned that software engineers should either embrace AI or leave the profession.

>>106155980
That is not coercion nor in any way helping their competitors. He's just stating something self-evident.

>>106151636 (OP)
>Is there a concerted effort to force, coerce or manipulate developers to use AI?
By people who stand to massively gain financially from this happening? Yes. The alternative is that they take a big loss and have their CEO friends (who are ostensibly in other industries) dunk on them all the way through their regular golf games, and nobody (who matters) wants that.

>>106151636 (OP)
The AI models are still to dumb for a lot of things. Over-reliance on it is profoundly self-sabotaging. Doing so hard locks you under a certain threshold of competence.

>>106151636 (OP)
>Is there a concerted effort to force, coerce or manipulate developers to use AI? Is this just business ("use our AI products!"), or is there power moves or politics involved? What are their plans?
AI is worthless and a massive bubble, so they're trying to force people to use it to justify massive stock prices and keep the capital flowing. Once this crap implodes it'll be glorious to see. It'll be the biggest financial wipeout in human history.

>>106155879
It’s worse than than, they have anti-technical backgrounds, like MBAs.
If anyone has an mba, i won’t hire them for a technical position, unless the answer to “why?” was “my wife made me do it” or something like that.

>>106151636 (OP)
>PLEASE KEEP INVESTING IN AI
>PLEASE KEEP INVESTING IN AI
>PLEASE KEEP INVESTING IN AI

>>106152943
>Fuck off, shill.
Excuse me sir, but can you clarify what you believe anti-CEO sentiment is shilling for?

>>106151636 (OP)
A long time ago there was man who served web pages out of a computer that was inserted up into his rectum. It was part of an event on a channel known as G4. With today's technology I think we could serve an AI-powered GitHub out of anyone's asshole. Let's do it, team.

>>106155844
>nocoder has an opinion about the future of programming

>>106151636 (OP)
At least this will be good for the future of FOSS as more and more distros ban AI commits from their repos. All the competent programmers will flock there while quality degrades elsewhere.

https://www.tomshardware.com/software/linux/linux-distros-ban-tainted-ai-generated-code
>NetBSD
>Gentoo
>Debian is debating it

>make the same google searches i always do
>1st result is ai
>it tells me what syntax i forgot how to use
im embracing it, leave me alone

>>106151636 (OP)
>can barely write a simple python script
>loses coherence completely at about ~1000 LoC
>HAHA THIS THING SURE WILL BE OF GREAT USE IN OUR 400K LoC CODEBASE THAT RUNS ON 12 YEAR OLD CUSTOMIZED VERSION OF PHP
hypebeasts gonna hype

>>106158265
Are you bothered that you got caught? Fuck off, shill.
And what you actually have is not
>anti-CEO sentiment
just pretensions.