I think from your top post you also miss “representative”.

If you measure something and amount is N=1 it might be a fact but still a fact true for a single person.

I often don’t need a sample size of 1000 to consider something worth of my time but if it is sample N=1 by a random person on the internet I am going to doubt that.

If I see 1000 people claiming it makes them more productive I am going to check. If it is going to be done by 5 people who I follow and expect they know tech quite well I am going to check as well.

▲

llmslave2 2 days ago | parent [-]

Checking is good, you should probably check.

Every person I respect as a great programmer thinks agentic workflows are a joke, and almost every programmer I hold in low regard thinks they're the greatest things ever, so while I still check, I'm naturally quite skeptical.

	▲	rjh29 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		Doesn't help that many people use AI to assist with autocompleting boilerplate crap or simple refactors, where it works well, or even the occasional small feature. But this is conflated with people who think you can just tell an AI to build an entire app and it'll go off and do it by itself in a giant feedback loop and it'll be perfect.
	▲	ozim 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		There are already people I follow who are startup owners and developers themselves saying they are not hiring “respectable developers” who are bashing agentic coding, they much rather hire junior who is starry eyed to work with agents. Because they see the value as they are running companies.