Most probably Microsoft has set objectives for how much LoC are from LLMs and developers invented numbers to match that metric (because they probably have things more important to do than counting LoC)
AI as auto complete is exactly what I was thinking.
I’ve seen lots of cases where AI appears as an auto complete suggestion and I can just hit <TAB> and it finishes the current line. It’s essentially filling in the boilerplate text. Heck in some cases it isn’t even right, but it’s close enough that I can change a few values.
I also want to point out that this isn’t particularly new technology. This existed before AI. It has perhaps expanded more, but it isn’t a revolutionary improvement, it’s an incremental one. So when we talk about usefulness, I think it is actually more useful.
Now if it could do all the magic planning and thinking, that would be more useful, but we’re not there yet.
Would be interesting to see how they measured that metric. Are they tagging individual lines as AI generated?
What those lines are too would be interesting, AI as auto complete is less dangerous than complete generation, but probably also less useful.
Most probably Microsoft has set objectives for how much LoC are from LLMs and developers invented numbers to match that metric (because they probably have things more important to do than counting LoC)
AI as auto complete is exactly what I was thinking.
I’ve seen lots of cases where AI appears as an auto complete suggestion and I can just hit <TAB> and it finishes the current line. It’s essentially filling in the boilerplate text. Heck in some cases it isn’t even right, but it’s close enough that I can change a few values.
I also want to point out that this isn’t particularly new technology. This existed before AI. It has perhaps expanded more, but it isn’t a revolutionary improvement, it’s an incremental one. So when we talk about usefulness, I think it is actually more useful.
Now if it could do all the magic planning and thinking, that would be more useful, but we’re not there yet.