Code Overload
The Effects of AI-Generated Code Tearing Through Corporations Is Actually Kind of Funny
Womp womp!
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/ai-code-tearing-through-corporations?fbclid=IwdGRjcAUiTvFjbGNrBSJOz2V4dG4DYWVtAjExAHBkb2YFc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQMMzUwNjg1NTMxNzI4AAEeYkU3864V42sO4SrzUjv8Jw-MJyna-AnD8Z4zZPt91H5dvGZ4z6okH1gGIuA_aem_V9l4gaSeeVtqdetGj7Vdsw

Corporations are rapidly embracing AI to churn out mountains of code.

Outwardly, this is presented as a revolution in productivity. But a behind the scenes look in The New York Times paints a slightly different, and somewhat comic, picture. Beleaguered programmers are being saddled with more code than what they know what to do with, while their employers struggle to find the best way to get them to check all the AI’s hastily written work.

One financial services company, for example, saw its coding output increase tenfold after embracing the popular AI tool Cursor — creating an epic backlog of one million lines of code that needs to be reviewed, according to Joni Klippert, CEO of the security startup StackHawk, which works with the financial firm.

And the code glut isn’t something that can be ignored. Left unchecked, bad code — regardless of whether it’s AI-generated or human-written — can gum up software and cause security flaws. Amazon and Meta both recently experienced disruptions after AI tools took unauthorized actions, and those are just the ones we’ve heard about.

“The sheer amount of code being delivered, and the increase in vulnerabilities, is something they can’t keep up with,” Klippert told the NYT. The accelerated output created a “lot of stress” in other departments, like sales and marketing support, she added.

Companies are still grappling with how to address the code glut. “The blessing and the curse is that now everyone inside your company becomes a coder,” Michele Catasta, the president and head of AI at the startup Replit, told the NYT.

Sachin Kamdar of the AI agent startup Elvix took a hardline approach: all code must be reviewed by a human, because it’d be harder to fix down the line if no one understood what the AI cooked up in the first place.

“It’s just going to break something, and they’re not going to know why it broke,” he told the NYT.

Another solution is throwing more AI at the problem. Anthropic and OpenAI have released AI agents designed to review code. And in December, Cursor, the provider of the much hyped AI coding tool, bought the startup Graphite, which builds an AI code reviewing platform.

Code Red
Software Engineer Says AI Is Causing Chaos Among Coders Who Now Just “Press Enter” All Day, Have Stopped Thinking or Understanding Software
“In reality, nobody is thinking anymore.”
https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/software-engineer-ai-chaos-press-enter-all-day?fbclid=IwdGRjcAUgzONjbGNrBSDMxHBkb2YFZXh0bgNhZW0CMTEAc3J0YwZhcHBfaWQMMzUwNjg1NTMxNzI4AAEefWnPdo2eueJOKmbizrYgNEo-Gpy5JGxEJfX7lvazLVC8NMjfvm24S5F_BcU_aem_81ha9Mmh96RBShDIzXdFMg

The advent of powerful AI coding tools has quickly made programmers heavily reliant on the tech, with experts warning that they’re slowly but surely losing the ability to write code by hand.

It’s a growing existential crisis that’s significantly raising the chance of errors or security issues in AI code that hasn’t been properly vetted. Experts are warning of a “class divide” between those, who are over relying on AI tools and more experienced coders, or “craftsmen,” who are left wading through the former’s group’s output and applying any necessary fixes.

https://www.theinformation.com/newsletters/ai-agenda/developers-find-ways-use-claude-code-without-anthropic-models

Marco Grossi built one of the internet’s most useful websites almost by accident.

In 2010, he needed a simple way to work with a PDF.

So he created his own tool.

That personal project became iLovePDF.

Today, millions of people use the site to merge, split, compress, convert and edit PDF files.

But despite its huge popularity, Grossi has kept the company independent.

He has said he has no outside investors and no interest in selling it.

He doesn’t even entertain acquisition proposals.

And while iLovePDF now offers paid premium features, many of its most useful tools remain free.

What started as one person solving his own problem became a tool used around the world.

Sometimes the best businesses begin with one simple question:

“Why isn’t there an easier way to do this?”

Emerson on kertonut uusia yksityiskohtia NI Nigel -tekoälynsä tietoturvasta ja tulevasta kehityksestä. LabVIEW-koodia ja TestStand-testisekvenssejä tuottava Nigel käyttää OpenAI-malleja Microsoftin Azure-ympäristössä, mutta käyttäjän keskustelut tallennetaan vain paikallisesti.

Emersonin mukaan Nigel toimii yhtiön suojatun pilvialustan päällä ja hyödyntää Azuressa ajettavia OpenAI-malleja. Käyttäjän promptit tallennetaan kuitenkin paikallisesti, eikä Emersonilla ole pääsyä Nigel-keskusteluihin, ellei käyttäjä itse erikseen jaa niitä yhtiölle.

Tietoturvaratkaisu on olennainen erityisesti testausympäristöissä, joissa tekoälylle voidaan antaa käsiteltäväksi tietoja testattavasta järjestelmästä, mittausjärjestelyistä ja ohjelmistosta. Nigel on integroitu suoraan NI:n testausohjelmistoihin yleiskäyttöisen selainpohjaisen tekoälypalvelun sijaan.

– Tämä ei ole hypeä, vaan näkyy konkreettisesti liiketoiminnassa, sanoo IT-palveluyhtiö Wittedin toimitusjohtaja Markus Huttunen. Yhtiön uusista ohjelmistokehityksen toimeksiannoista jo noin puolessa tekoälyn käyttö on keskeinen vaatimus.

Wittedin mukaan tekoäly ei näissä projekteissa ole enää pelkästään kehittäjän työtä nopeuttava apuväline. Sitä käytetään koko tuotekehityksessä liiketoiminnan tarpeiden määrittelystä arkkitehtuurisuunnitteluun ja koodin tarkastamiseen.

Yhtiön sisäisessä kyselyssä 82 prosenttia ohjelmistoammattilaisista kertoi käyttävänsä tekoälytyökaluja päivittäin. Yhtä suuri osuus katsoi tekoälyn muuttaneen tapaansa tehdä työtä.

Erityisen suuri ero näkyi AI-agenttien käytössä. Niitä säännöllisesti käyttävistä 96 prosenttia arvioi työnsä muuttuneen merkittävästi. Agentteja käyttämättömistä näin arvioi 45 prosenttia.

Being tied to Anthropic’s AI models and subscription plans is probably one of the most disappointing aspects of Claude Code! You end up paying quite a lot every month, even when you can’t access all models. But what if we no longer need Claude Code? What if you could bring the models you want into a more open coding agent? I’ve been testing one of the best replacements for Claude Code recently — Qwen Code — and it is more flexible than you imagine. The best part? It is completely free to use.