More than a quarter of new code at Google is generated by AI. (www.theverge.com)
from Dot@feddit.org to technology@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 06:53
https://feddit.org/post/4251479

#technology

threaded - newest

Bogasse@lemmy.ml on 30 Oct 07:44 next collapse

Not disappointed by The Verge, first paragraph paraphrases the title with no source and the following is just off topic.

Dot@feddit.org on 30 Oct 08:10 collapse

The source for first paragraph: blog.google/…/alphabet-earnings-q3-2024/

baru@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 09:53 next collapse

Ah, indeed:

Today, more than a quarter of all new code at Google is generated by AI, then reviewed and accepted by engineers. This helps our engineers do more and move faster.

Sounds like bs to me, comes across as marketing talk to promote their AI offerings.

Bogasse@lemmy.ml on 30 Oct 17:32 collapse

I agree that it’s suspicious. This is a HUGE number that would imply a drastic change in their development process and I’m surprised that they don’t give much more information, especially since (as you said) it would promote their product.

btaf45@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:29 collapse

They don’t give information because there is no information to give. It is just empty rhetoric to bullshit financial analysts. The CEO probably just sent out a company wide email a week before telling developers to do this and they all laughed.

Bogasse@lemmy.ml on 30 Oct 17:26 collapse

Thanks ! ❤️

dan@upvote.au on 30 Oct 07:51 next collapse

I really don’t believe the headline. Google has thousands of teams of engineers that are writing code for hundreds of different products… There’s no way all of them are generating anywhere near 25% of their new code via AI.

Unless they’re doing something like generating massive test fixtures or training data sets using AI and classifying them as “code” 🤔

Shiggles@sh.itjust.works on 30 Oct 08:51 next collapse

How often does a solution need “new” code and not “basically the same code as a previous issue but with two small details changed”? This is a genuine question, I have only ever coded as a hobby. But 25% of your work being essentially just copy pasted sounds plausible, and that’s sorta all LLMs are doing, right?

dan@upvote.au on 30 Oct 15:27 next collapse

Reusable code is usually pulled out into a library and reused that way, rather than copied and pasted into a new project. You might copy and paste some boilerplate to new projects but it wouldn’t be anywhere near 25% of the code.

I’m not sure why someone downvoted you (it wasn’t me!) because your comment did seem like a genuine question.

theneverfox@pawb.social on 03 Nov 18:55 collapse

Pretty often, but then you can just refactor the code so you can use it for more situations

What LLMs are good at are the opposite - when the thing you want to do is almost exactly the same, but nearly all the details need to be changed

Say you want a page to edit account details, and another page to edit community details. And the API paths to do this will be even more similar - but because they’re different things, you’d have to get fancy with the design to make code that works for both… It’s possible, but there will be trade-offs

LLMs are great at it though… Pass in the account page, give it the object definition for the community details, and it’ll spit it out for you

0x0@programming.dev on 30 Oct 09:16 next collapse

I really don’t believe the headline.

The The company had a strong quarter thanks in large part to AI. part is what makes it sound strange to me, sounds like shareholder egostrking.

That said all they need to do is mandate use of AI during development like my company’s done and they can boast this kind of bullshit easily.

aidan@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 10:30 collapse

That said all they need to do is mandate use of AI during development

Wtf does that mean? Like what if you know exactly what you want to do? Do you have to ask GPT to review your code?

0x0@programming.dev on 30 Oct 13:56 collapse

Where i work they had us use AI with the IDEs.

I’d say about 20% of the times what it suggests is actually usable.

That’s autocomplete on steroids for you.

FarceOfWill@infosec.pub on 30 Oct 11:15 collapse

I wonder if “code” means pull requests and they have a load of automated ones to update versions of external and internal libraries

emax_gomax@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 12:30 collapse

Given the size of lockfiles this would not surprise me but who the hell counts lock files code. Their barely configs :/.

just_another_person@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 08:04 next collapse

Makes sense considering how shitty Google products have become.

CosmoNova@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 08:35 next collapse

Now they can fill new holes at the google graveyard at twice the speed!

hendrik@palaver.p3x.de on 30 Oct 10:07 next collapse

I've read exactly the opposite article a few days ago:

https://www.cio.com/article/3540579/devs-gaining-little-if-anything-from-ai-coding-assistants.html

btaf45@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:26 collapse

This company wasn’t trying to bullshit financial analysts which was the reason for the google CEO comment.

TheGrandNagus@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 10:20 next collapse

25% of all new code written at all? Sure, I guess.

25% of all new code that actually gets used in a real product, not just tested in an IDE? Bullshit.

BruceTwarzen@lemm.ee on 30 Oct 10:47 collapse

I wonder if they do the monkey writing shakespeare experiment but with code. If you keep letting it write code, something has to come out of it.

DudeImMacGyver@sh.itjust.works on 30 Oct 11:12 collapse

You still need to check the hell out of it because AI is wildly unreliable.

Spacehooks@reddthat.com on 30 Oct 10:53 next collapse

Ah Elon most love all this extra code being written. If course it’s super inefficient but look at all those lines sooo much code.

kamiheku@sopuli.xyz on 30 Oct 13:26 next collapse

Are the lines salient though?

btaf45@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 21:25 collapse

How is Elon going to tell the AI to print its code on hardcopy and then fly to Elon’s city to show him your hardcopy code like he told actual Twitter developers to do?

mEEGal@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 11:21 next collapse

NICE TRY, AI !

realharo@lemm.ee on 30 Oct 11:45 next collapse

If they’re counting all the auto-completed code that’s inserted after pressing Tab on an AI suggestion (such as from Copilot), then I easily believe it.

Tons of places in code only have 1 possible thing that can go on a particular line, given the context, and there is no point in typing it all out manually.

friend_of_satan@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 12:45 next collapse

Does this mean “AI was used as a fancy autocomplete”? Because that’s my number 1 use case for AI like copilot, and if that’s the case, over 25% of my code is written by AI. But let me tell you, it still gets it wrong, repeatedly making the same syntax errors no matter how many times I correct it. It starts to get it right, then later reverts to making the same syntax errors, even making up variable names that violate widely known public APIs.

prof@infosec.pub on 30 Oct 15:07 next collapse

Agreed. It’s really shit for new code, but if I’m writing glue code stuff or repetitive code it saves a lot of time spent on typing.

phoenixz@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 20:18 collapse

Auto complete is about… 60% helpful and increases my productivity with about 5-10% as I need to double check everything it does and half the time it’s something ridiculously stoopid

friend_of_satan@lemmy.world on 30 Oct 17:38 next collapse

Awesome. How much more time off to google software engineers get? I guess it’s none.

LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 00:04 collapse

They just laid off a ton of them instead.

Randomgal@lemmy.ca on 31 Oct 00:06 collapse

A quarter of them.

LavenderDay3544@lemmy.world on 31 Oct 01:00 collapse

Coincidence?

phoenixz@lemmy.ca on 30 Oct 20:17 collapse

That would explain the decline in quality of everything from Google. Even Gmail is becoming buggy as hell, even though I haven’t seen any new features added. I have used Gmail since it’s founding and only in the last year or so did it become extremely buggy.