I don't understand the question. For one thing I use local models mainly, but even if I didn't, I'd be buying the tokens from cloud model providers, not the prepackaged, fully complete software itself. I buy the tokens to make what I want.

It's actually quite similar to buying the services of a programmer off Upwork to build something for me, only with LLMs it's way cheaper and faster, with a shorter feedback loop.

▲

slopinthebag an hour ago | parent [-]

I think their point is that you aren't really doing the implementing, Claude (or any model really) is. If you genuinely find prompting LLMs to be fun, then by all means go for it.

▲

satvikpendem 32 minutes ago | parent [-]

What I find fun is getting the output to exactly what I want. I don't care whether I'm personally implementing something or not, and that's what many in this thread seem not to understand.

	▲	unknownfuture 29 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		I'm just gonna hop in and say: I get it. If I spend a weekend standing up a self-hosted media system or something, I doubt anyone would dispute that's a fun building exercise. If I do the same thing but use an LLM to build out instead, somehow it's not. Yeah it's not the same kind of building as what we might have done pre-LLM but it need not be any less satisfying or rewarding. The real disconnect seems to be the classic dichotomy: people who see coding as the point and the purpose, vs people who just want an outcome. And that's fine! I'm just don't understand why the one camp feels the need to deride the other.