I love using AI to code, as it saves me a lot of boring and repetitive typing.

I only commit code that is roughly the same as I would have written anyway.

It feels as good for developer ergonomics as the move away from CRT monitors.

I think I’m lucky that I never enjoyed programming, I enjoyed thinking about problems. That makes AI coding great, because I’m good enough at programming that I can describe what I want easily to an LLM, and I can judge the results very well for myself. I read and understand each line so I know I’m not committing crap.

	▲	serial_dev 10 hours ago \| parent [-]
		I feel similarly. I wanted to develop software, I didn’t want to “program”. I want my code to fix problems, I want the end result to feel great to use, I want it to be able to fix problems and feel great a year from now, too. I want to be better month after month, I want to be able to discover new areas. Using AI tools makes sense to me. It’s important that you don’t believe everything the hype men are telling on Twitter, but it would also be a mistake to believe there is nothing valuable in this technology.

▲

brailsafe 10 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-]

> It feels as good for developer ergonomics as the move away from CRT monitors.

I kind of think CRT monitors were much better for developer ergonomics than LCD because of the tendency to set modern monitors much deeper into the desk and have to lean forward to see them. CRTs forced you to sit with better posture

▲

xantronix 10 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Just how much boilerplate have people been putting up with for this to be an oft cited advantage of LLM usage? I know boilerplate has to exist somewhere, but I've been labouring these past couple decades under the assumption that boilerplate should be rare and to be avoided.