How exactly am I betting my career on LLMs failing? The inverse is definitely true — going all in on LLMs feels like betting on the future success of LLMs. However not using LLMs to program today is not betting on anything, except maybe myself, but even that’s a stretch.

After all, I can always pick up LLMs in the future. If a few weeks is long enough for all my priors to become stale, why should I have to start now? Everything I learn will be out of date in a few weeks. Things will only be easier to learn 6, 12, 18 months from now.

Also no where in my post did I say that LLMs can’t be useful to anyone. In fact I said the opposite. If you like LLMs or benefit from them, then you’re probably already using them, in which case I’m not advocating anyone stop. However there are many segments of people who LLMs are not for. No tool is a panacea. I’m just trying to nip and FUD in the butt.

There are so many demands for our attention in the modern world to stay looped in and up to date on everything; I’m just here saying don’t fret. Do what you enjoy. LLMs will be here in 12 months. And again in 24. And 36. You don’t need to care now.

And yes I mentor several juniors (designers and engineers). I do not let them use LLMs for anything and actively discourage them from using LLMs. That is not what I’m trying to do in this post, but for those whose success I am invested in, who ask me for advice, I quite confidently advise against it. At least for now. But that is a separate matter.

EDIT: My exact words from another comment in this thread prior to your comment:

> I’m open to programming with LLMs, and I’m entirely fine with people using them and I’m glad people are happy.

I wonder, what drives this intense FOMO ideation about AI tools as expressed further upthread?

How does someone reconcile a faith that AI tooling is rapdily improving with that contradictory belief that there is some permanent early-adopter benefit?