> I'm a programmer, and I use automatic programming. The code I generate in this way is mine. My code, my output, my production. I, and you, can be proud.

I disagree. The code you wrote is a collaboration with the model you used. To frame it this way, you are taking credit for the work the model did on your behalf. There is a difference between I wrote this code entirely by myself and I wrote the code with a partner. For me, it is analogous to the author of the score of an opera taking credit for the libretto because they gave the libretto author the rough narrative arc. If you didn't do it yourself, it isn't yours.

I generally prefer integrated works or at least ones that clearly acknowledge the collaboration and give proper credit.

Also it's not only the work of "the model" it's the work of human beings the model is trained on, often illegally.

The line gets blurrier the more auto-complete you use.

Agentic programming is at the end of the day a higher level auto complete, with extremely fuzzy matching on English.

But when you write a block and you let copilot complete 3, 4, 5 statements. Are you really writing the code?

Prompting the AI is indeed “do[ing] it yourself”. There’s nobody else here, and this code is original and never existed before, and would not exist here and now if I hadn’t prompted this machine.

How many JavaScript libraries does the average fortune 1000 developer invoke when programming?