[heyts]

I’m probably going to be downvoted for this but this thread doesn’t really reflect well on the promises of Generative AI and particularly the constantly reiterated assurance that we’re on the verge of a new industrial Revolution.

[somewhereoutth]

Agreed. Many of the suggestions are pretty much code it yourself, but without actually tapping the individual keys.

Furthermore, and more generally, one of the great things about (traditional) coding is that it allows 'thinking through making' - by building something you learn more about the problem and thus how best to solve it. Code generation just leaves you with reviewing, which is less powerful in this way I believe. See also 'thinking through writing [prose]'.

[realusername]

I said it since the very first video of somebody who built a login page with it. They kept adding more and more constraints and at some point it's just coding but with extra steps.

It doesn't mean those tools do not have value though but they're not capable of "coding ", in the sense we mean in the industry, and generating code isn't coding.

[ziml77]

I'm feeling the same way. It's quite the contrast from all the hype posts that make it sound like you give the AI a rough idea of what you're looking for and then it will build it from start to finish on its own.

[coffeefirst]

Yes. I’m trying it, it’s too early for me to state a conclusion, but it’s not clear what the point is of an interface that requires magic touch best described as je ne sais quoi.

The alternative to this isn’t even necessarily no AI, just not using it this way.

[rybosworld]

I don't think the OP gave enough information for us to really have any honest conversation about this one way or the other.

That said: I suspect that OP is providing low-detail prompts.

These tools cannot read your mind. If you provide an under-specified prompt, they will fill in all the details for things that are necessary to complete the task, but that you didn't provide. This is how you end up with slop.