| ▲ | tux1968 3 hours ago |
| Maybe you disagree with it, but it seems like a pretty straightforward argument: A lot of us dismiss AI because "it can't be trusted to do as good a job as me". The OP is arguing that someone, who can do better than most of us, disagrees with this line of thinking. And if we have respect for his abilities, and recognize them as better than our own, we should perhaps re-assess our own rationale in dismissing the utility of AI assistance. If he can get value out of it, surely we can too if we don't argue ourselves out of giving it a fair shake. The flip side of that argument might be that you have to be a much better programmer than most of us are, to properly extract value out of the AI... maybe it's only useful in the hands of a real expert. |
|
| ▲ | jplusequalt 3 hours ago | parent [-] |
| >A lot of us dismiss AI because "it can't be trusted to do as good a job as me" Some of us enjoy learning how systems work, and derive satisfaction from the feeling of doing something hard, and feel that AI removes that satisfaction. If I wanted to have something else write the code, I would focus on becoming a product manager, or a technical lead. But as is, this is a craft, and I very much enjoy the autonomy that comes with being able to use this skill and grow it. |
| |
| ▲ | mitchellh 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | There is no dichotomy of craft and AI. I consider myself a craftsman as well. AI gives me the ability to focus on the parts I both enjoy working on and that demand the most craftsmanship. A lot of what I use AI for and show in the blog isn’t coding at all, but a way to allow me to spend more time coding. This reads like you maybe didn’t read the blog post, so I’ll mention there many examples there. | | | |
| ▲ | fizx 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I enjoy Japanese joinery, but for some reason the housing market doesn't. | |
| ▲ | tux1968 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Nobody is trying to talk anyone out of their hobby or artisanal creativeness. A lot of people enjoy walking, even after the invention of the automobile. There's nothing wrong with that, there are even times when it's the much more efficient choice. But in the context of say transporting packages across the country... it's not really relevant how much you enjoy one or the other; only one of them can get the job done in a reasonable amount of time. And we can assume that's the context and spirit of the OP's argument. | | |
| ▲ | mold_aid 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | >Nobody is trying to talk anyone out of their hobby or artisanal creativeness. Well, yes, they are, some folks don't think "here's how I use AI" and "I'm a craftsman!" are consistent. Seems like maybe OP should consider whether "AI is a tool, why can't you use it right" isn't begging the question. Is this going to be the new rhetorical trick, to say "oh hey surely we can all agree I have reasonable goals! And to the extent they're reasonable you are unreasonable for not adopting them"? | |
| ▲ | jplusequalt 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | >But in the context of say transporting packages across the country... it's not really relevant how much you enjoy one or the other; only one of them can get the job done in a reasonable amount of time. I think one of the more frustrating aspects of this whole debate is this idea that software development pre-AI was too "slow", despite the fact that no other kind of engineering has nearly the same turn around time as software engineering does (nor does they have the same return on investment!). I just end up rolling my eyes when people use this argument. To me it feels like favoring productivity over everything else. | | |
|
|
