[narush]

Hey HN -- study author here! (See previous thread on the paper here [1].)

I think this blog post is an interesting take on one specific factor that is likely contributing to slowdown. We discuss this in the paper [2] in the section "Implicit repository context (C.1.5)" -- check it out if you want to see some developer quotes about this factor.

> This is why AI coding tools, as they exist today, will generally slow someone down if they know what they are doing, and are working on a project that they understand.

I made this point in the other thread discussing the study, but in general, these results being surprising makes it easy to read the paper, find one factor that resonates, and conclude "ah, this one factor probably just explains slowdown." My guess: there is no one factor -- there's a bunch of factors that contribute to this result -- at least 5 seem likely, and at least 9 we can't rule out (see the full factors table on page 11).

> If there are no takers then I might try experimenting on myself.

This sounds super cool! I'd be very excited to see how you set this up + how it turns out... please do shoot me an email (in the paper) if you do this!

> AI slows down open source developers. Peter Naur can teach us why

Nit: I appreciate how hard it is to write short titles summarizing the paper (the graph title is the best I was able to do after a lot of trying) -- but I might have written this "Early-2025 AI slows down experienced open-source developers. Peter Naur can give us more context about one specific factor." It's admittedly less of a catchy-title, but I think getting the qualifications right are really important!

Thanks again for the sweet write-up! I'll hang around in the comments today as well.

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44522772

[2] https://metr.org/Early_2025_AI_Experienced_OS_Devs_Study.pdf

[seanwilson]

If this makes sense, how is the study able to give a reasonable measure of how long an issue/task should have taken, vs how long it took with AI to determine that using AI was slower?

Or it's comparing how long the dev thought it should take with AI vs how long it actually took, which now includes the dev's guess of how AI impacts their productivity?

When it's hard to estimate how difficult an issue should be to complete, how does the study account for this? What percent speed up or slow down would be noise due to estimates being difficult?

I do appreciate that this stuff is very hard to measure.

[krona]

An easier way to think about it might be if you timed how long it took each ticket in your backlog. You also recorded whether you were drunk or not when you worked on it, and the ticket was selected at random from your backlog. The assumption (null-hypothesis) is that being drunk has no effect on ticket completion time.

Using the magic of statistics, if you have completed enough tickets, we can determine whether the null-hypothesis holds (for a given level of statistical certainty), and if it doesn't, low large is the difference (with a margin of error).

That's not to say there couldn't be other causes for the difference (if there is one), but that's how science proceeds, generally.

[calf]

Slowing down isn't necessarily bad, maybe slow programming (literate/Knuth comes to mind as another early argument) encourages better theory formation. Maybe programming today is like fast food, and proper theory and abstraction (and language design) requires a good measure of slow and deliberate work that has not been the norm in industry.

[jwhiles]

Thanks for the response, and apologies for misrepresenting your results somewhat! I'm probably not going to change the title since I am at heart and polemicist and a sloppy thinker, but I'll update the article to call out this misrepresentation.

That said, I think that what I wrote more or less encompasses three of the factors you call out as being likely to contribute: "High developer familiarity with reposito- ries", "Large and complex repositories", and "Implicit repository context".

I thought more about experimenting on myself, and while I hope to do it - I think it will be very hard to create a controlled enviornment whilst also responding to the demands the job puts on me. I also don't have the luxury of a list of well scoped tasks that could feasibly be completed in a few hours.

[karmakaze]

I would expect any change to an optimized workflow (developing own well understood project) to initially be slower. What I'd like to see is how these same developers do 6 months or a year from now after using AI has become the natural workflow on these same projects. The article mentions that these results don't extrapolate to other devs, but it's important to note that it may not extrapolate over time to these same devs.

I myself am just getting started and I can see how so many things can be scripted with AI that would be very difficult to (semi-)automate without. You gotta ask yourself "Is it worth the time?"[0]

[0] https://xkcd.com/1205/

[antonvs]

> Early-2025 AI slows down experienced open-source developers.

Even that's too general, because it'll depend on what the task is. It's not as if open source developers in general never work on tasks where AI could save time.

[narush]

We call this over-generalization out specifically in the "We do not provide evidence that:" table in the blog post and paper - I agree there are tasks these developers are likely sped up on with early-2025 tools.