With GenAI "Copilots" now embedded in LCNC tools, a user can type "Build me an expense tracker," and the AI generates it. Does this make it too easy? Are we losing the "logic" behind the build, and does this increase the risk of AI-generated bugs?
3 answers
GenAI is a superpower, but it shifts the role from "Builder" to "Editor." You still need to understand the business logic to verify the AI's work. The risk isn't "bad code"—it's "bad logic." If you ask for a flawed process, the AI will build a very efficient flawed process.
It actually improves security. Many LCNC AI assistants can now auto-suggest security best practices or flag if you're trying to connect to a restricted data source. It's like having a tiny IT auditor sitting on your shoulder while you build.
GenAI also helps with Maintenance. You can ask the Copilot, "Explain what this workflow does," and it will document the app for you. This solves the major hurdle of "Zombie Apps" created by people who didn't leave notes.
This has reduced our handover time by 60%. Documentation used to be the thing everyone skipped; now the AI does it as you build.
Exactly. We call it "Prompt Engineering for Business." The training in 2025 isn't about "how to drag a button," it's about "how to describe a business problem clearly."