Microsoft: 20-30% of code is created by AI - Page 1
Forum section: electronics / general

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2025, 01:37:21 pm
content: The discussion:Welcome to LlamaCon 2025 - Closing Session!Media:30 percent of some Microsoft code now written by AI - especially the new stuff,https://www.theregister.com/2025/04/30/microsoft_meta_autocoding/

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: April 30, 2025, 03:28:58 pm
content: That's great news for their competitors.

author: Analog Kid
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2025, 02:39:44 am
content: I can see it now: a new global ad campaign.Gigantic billboards going up in every city across the world:You Can Be Replaced!

author: golden_labels
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2025, 04:36:59 am
content: I stopped watching the moment I heard the dystopian sci-fi robotic voice telling me “please enjoy your networking break.” Forgive me commenting without seeing it.My first thought, when I saw the 30% figure reported in media, was the same Zuckerberg mentioned: auto-completion and templated generation. It is not far off from the value I would expect even in my own code in early 2000s. This number wouldn’t go down for environments, where coders are pressed into delivering quickly.Increase in code generation or otherwise relying 3rd parties is also a constant trend since 1980s at least. Recall, how you did GUIs in 1990s? What part of your work on writing this code has by 2010s been replaced by generators and libraries? C’mon, 30–60%. Now consider, how much assembly you may skip by compilers generating it for you. LLMs are very different from earlier generators, and the errors they introduce are of different nature. I’m not trying to put the equality sign between those situations. But there are parallels. In particular regarding “they take our jobs.” Yes, they take our jobs the same way compilers and GUI editors took, the same way 3rd party libraries becoming the norm did, the same way frameworks did. Which goes in tandem with increase in software complexity and capabilities.As for the error rate, it’s also worth noting we’re talking about big software corporations. A large portion of workforce is a particular kind of programmer, who outputs large amounts of garbage, reviewed and corrected later by a much smaller group of better paid, local people. Can LLM do much worse?

author: twospoons
author_rank: Frequent Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2025, 04:52:44 am
content: Shouldn't that read "30% of code isstolenby AI"?

author: madires
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2025, 08:24:13 am
content: Possibly trained with posts from Stack Exchange.

author: SiliconWizard
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 01, 2025, 12:53:18 pm
content: Quote from: golden_labels on May 01, 2025, 04:36:59 amYes they can. Granted the situation is already pretty bad, but we can definitely do even worse!While there's always a limit in how good we can get, there's practicaly no limit as to how low we can sink.The big issue with LLMs is that by nature, they "don't know what they are doing". You can expect the average engineer to at least half know what they're doing, that's already a bit of a change.But the biggest issue IMO is not even that: it's what I've been raising all along: accountability.Sure, you can have bad engineers and lazy people, but ultimately they are held accountable, and that kind of helps a little. A lack of accountability can only lead to disasters.Sure, in the beginning, you'll still have people *using* LLM-based tools and help accountable for the end result, but that line is going to shrink, and as companies increasingly rely on "AI", in the end, nobody will be accountable. There's a bug? We don't know, that's the AI. Hey, the AI is always right, so maybe there's no bug at all and customers are the bug.This is again not just "yet another tool". That's the key.But as I said in my previous post, good news for those who don't rely on that crap, but they'll have to be a bit patient.The backlash will be severe.

author: amyk
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2025, 04:26:08 am
content: That certainly explains the quality (or lack thereof) of their latest products...

author: radiolistener
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: May 17, 2025, 05:28:36 am
content: It is likely referring to 20–30% of the test code being written by AI.Such a high percentage for the main application code seems unlikely to me.By the way, could you recommend any LLM-based tools for code analysis?So far, I’ve only used chat-gpt, but its limited context window makes it impossible for analyzing even small applications.

author: artag
author_rank: Super Contributor
timestamp: June 29, 2025, 04:01:25 pm
content: 20% by AI, 20% by engineers and the rest by RNG. Or monkeys with terminals.