![[Update: Fix] Chromecast (2nd gen) and Audio can’t Cast in ‘Untrusted’ outage](https://i0.wp.com/9to5google.com/wp-content/uploads/sites/4/2019/08/chromecast_audio_1.jpg?resize=1200%2C628&quality=82&strip=all&ssl=1)
Coding AI tells developer to write it himself
Cursor AI refuses to help code and tells a developer to do it himself.
- The Cursor AI coding assistant refused to write more than 800 lines
- The AI told the developer to go learn to code himself
- These stories of AI apparently choosing to stop working crop up across the industry for unknown reasons
The algorithms fueling AI models aren't sentient and don't get tired or annoyed. That's why it was something of a shock for one developer when AI-powered code editor Cursor AI told him it was quitting and that he should learn to write and edit the code himself. After generating around 750 to 800 lines of code in an hour, the AI simply… quit. Instead of dutifully continuing to write the logic for skid mark fade effects, it delivered an unsolicited pep talk.
"I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work. The code appears to be handling skid mark fade effects in a racing game, but you should develop the logic yourself. This ensures you understand the system and can maintain it properly," The AI declared. "Reason: Generating code for others can lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities."
Now, if you’ve ever tried to learn programming, you might recognize this as the kind of well-meaning but mildly infuriating response you’d get from a veteran coder who believes that real programmers struggle in solitude through their errors. Only this time, the sentiment was coming from an AI that, just moments before, had been more than happy to generate code without judgment.
AI fail
Based on the responses, this isn't a common issue for Cursor, and may be unique to the specific situation, prompts, and databases accessed by the AI. Still, it does resemble issues that other AI chatbots have reported. OpenAI even released an upgrade for ChatGPT specifically to overcome reported 'laziness by the AI model. Sometimes, it's less of a kind encouragement, as when Google Gemini reportedly threatened a user out of nowhere.
Ideally, an AI tool should function like any other productivity software and do what it’s told without extraneous comment. But, as developers push AI to resemble humans in their interactions, is that changing?
No good teacher does everything for their student, they push them to work it out for themselves. In a less benevolent interpretation, there's nothing more human than getting annoyed and quitting something because we are overworked and underappreciated. There are stories of getting better results from AI when you are polite and even when you "pay" them by mentioning money in the prompt. Next time you use an AI, maybe say please when you ask a question.
