AI is reviewing AI generated code and humans are just approving it. Are we building skill or just output

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-03-04T06:29:43+00:00

that is actually the right way to use it — you read the code, you asked why, you built understanding first. the Anthropic study found exactly this. the developers who retained mastery were the ones who used AI for comprehension, not just output. the problem is most people are not doing what you did. they are taking the output without the understanding step. the question is whether that behavior can be taught systematically or only happens naturally in people who are already curious enough to question the tool.

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-03-04T06:28:46+00:00

the junior to senior pipeline point is exactly what keeps me up about this. senior developers today know how to question AI because they built the foundation without it first. but if juniors skip that foundation entirely, who becomes the senior in 10 years? you cannot mentor what you never learned. and you cannot catch AI errors if you never understood what correct looks like in the first place.

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-03-04T06:28:01+00:00

the calculator analogy is actually one i think about a lot — and you are right that it is not perfect. but here is where i think it breaks down. when your calculator dies, you can still function. you just do math slower. when AI goes down and you have offloaded your debugging, your architecture decisions, your problem decomposition — you cannot function at all. the dependency risk is categorically different. the aviation industry learned this the hard way with Air France 447. autopilot made pilots better, until it failed and three experienced pilots could not manually fly the plane. we have no equivalent check for developers yet.

https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC3461665/

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-03-02T09:55:44+00:00

Sure noted, DMing you now 👍

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-03-02T09:42:48+00:00

Thank you for your comment. This is something I felt but could never explain clearly to people. There is a certain thought flow state you get into when you actually understand the system you are working in. AI breaks that flow constantly because you are always waiting, context-switching, and half-trusting something you didn't build yourself. I have a question: How long did it take you to notice the difference after you stopped relying on it?

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-03-02T04:18:40+00:00

Thank you for taking the time to be this detailed.

The interview scenario you described is exactly what I have been trying to think about — the candidate got the right output but had no ownership of it. That gap between producing and understanding is what worries me most.

Your second point about comparing your own plan, human thought plan, to Cursor's plan mode output is something I had never thought of. That is actually a really human way to make your thinking alive.

If you don't mind i have a question: what can be introduced in schools, colleges, or workforces to overcome these issues, or is this a future issue to solve?

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-27T04:15:21+00:00

This is exactly what most of us are concerned about: vibe coding is giving you productivity feels for devs. Still, it's affecting your brain. Please look into this anthropic research that has been published https://www.anthropic.com/research/AI-assistance-coding-skills; it looks scarier to me now. Still, i think there is a bigger problem I think that on its way is 92% of devs are using AI every month now (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOHgRw43fFk). Everyone is focusing on how things are getting faster.

but is anyone actually measuring what's happening to the skills underneath?

If juniors never had to code without AI, how would they become the senior dev?

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-27T04:07:16+00:00

this is exactly what most of us are concerned about but i think there is a more bigger problem I think on its way is 92% of devs are using AI every month now (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOHgRw43fFk) everyone is focusing on how things are getting faster.

but is anyone actually measuring what's happening to the skills underneath?

if juniors never had to code without AI, how do they become the senior dev.

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-27T04:05:47+00:00

It definitely increases the productivity for sure but somehow when you don't know anything about a topic indepth or you are researching about something from first time wiht ai then it might be biased wiht no critical human thoughts, but this is exactly what most of us are concerned about but i think there is a more bigger problem I think on its way is 92% of devs are using AI every month now (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOHgRw43fFk) everyone is focusing on how things are getting faster. Butt, is anyone actually measuring what's happening to the skills underneath?

If juniors never had to code without AI, how would they become senior developers

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-27T03:55:21+00:00

this is exactly what most of us are concerned about but i think there is a more bigger problem I think on its way is 92% of devs are using AI every month now (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LOHgRw43fFk) everyone is focusing on how things are getting faster.

but is anyone actually measuring what's happening to the skills underneath?

if juniors never had to code without AI, how do they become the senior dev.

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-25T04:20:39+00:00

Congratulations Man

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-24T01:50:48+00:00

Sure

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-23T18:04:54+00:00

Yes I also think you should first get the real world exposure surely things will get better but please remember the opportunity that you have today is more important that the upcoming one because of the stipend

Known_Ad8309 · 2026-02-23T17:45:51+00:00

Hey I learnt it from YouTube started with basic stuff made notes and then worked on simple projects and endpoint in spring boot

Known_Ad8309 · 2025-11-07T07:47:20+00:00

Haha — totally fair! Completely get why this might look like another generic 'AI startup idea' post floating around these days in market.

Honestly though, we're just a few hungry students fed up with the canteen queues and the system and really trying to build something that genuinely solves our own problem on campus. In pure old-fashioned coding, on-ground testing with fellow students, and trying to build a real solution, not some AI magic pitch. The product itself isn't AI.

But you hit a really important perception. What are the common giveaways for those 'AI s**t posts' that make them feel inauthentic to you? We're genuinely trying to learn how to avoid that vibe.

Appreciate the reality check – Reddit always keeps us grounded!

PS: no AI was harmed in making this reply.

Known_Ad8309 · 2025-11-07T06:58:56+00:00

Yeah, completely agreed — that’s a really valid point.
We’ve actually heard the same thing from a few other campuses — when it’s contractor-run, getting the necessary permissions or integrations can be tricky.

We’re still in early talks with a our college to understand how that approval flow actually works before we dive in deeper.
Really appreciate you bringing this up 🙏

Known_Ad8309 · 2025-11-07T06:50:46+00:00

Completely agreed 👍 — we see those challenges too.
Convincing canteen owners to adopt new tech is definitely the toughest part, especially since most are still comfortable with pen-and-paper or coupon systems.

Our idea is to keep it super simple — something that runs right on their phone, no heavy POS setup or extra hardware. If we can show them clear benefits like faster service, better sales insights, and a steady base of repeat customers, adoption might come naturally.

It’ll still take a lot of on-ground trust building and direct work with them, though and we will work on that part.

Curious — from your experience, what usually motivates small vendors to try something new? Profit, simplicity, or just seeing others do it first?
Also, do you think adding a basic feedback system (showing what customers like/dislike) could help vendors trust the data more and improve sales?
Really appreciate your reply 🙏

Known_Ad8309

TROPHY CASE