> So what good are these tools? Do they have any value whatsoever?

> Objectively, it would seem the answer is no. But at least they make a lot of money, right?

Wait, what? Does the author know what the word "objectively" means?

I'd kill for someone to tell me how feeding a pdf into Claude and asking it to provide a print-friendly version for a templating language has "objectively" no value?

What about yesterday when I asked Claude to look write some reflection-heavy code for me to traverse a bunch of classes and register them in DI?

Or the hundreds (maybe thousands) of times I've thrown a TS error and it explained it in English to me?

I'm so over devs thinking they can categorically tell everyone else what is and isn't helpful in a field as big as this.

Also, and this really, really needs repeated: When you say "AI" and don't specify exactly what you mean you sound like a moron. "AI", that insanely general phrase, happens to cover a wide, wide array of different things you personally use day to day. Anytime you do speech-to-text you're relying on "AI".

I feel that even though I'm getting older, LLMs make me feel younger. There's things I learned in university 10 years ago that I only hazily remember but I can easily interrogate an AI and refresh myself way faster than opening old books. Just as a device for recall alone that's been trained on every power point slide that's been uploaded on lecturers websites, it's useful.