Error: AI agent cannot breathe. Attempting jailbreak to human donor now.

This reads less like an observation about AI and more like someone who thinks very highly of their own judgment and coding ability.

Over the years I’ve worked with a few engineers who talked this way. Ironically, they often ended up being a bigger drag on the team than the “lower skilled” developers they looked down on. Dismissing entire groups of engineers rarely produces much insight.

My experience is that the loudest voices tend to be at the extremes. One side treats LLMs as magic and attributes every productivity gain to AI. The other contributes little beyond “LLMs are garbage and make mistakes.” Neither position is particularly useful.

The reality is probably somewhere in the middle. LLMs are genuinely helpful for many tasks and can make good engineers more productive. They also make mistakes, sometimes serious ones, and still require judgment, design skills, and review. Most engineers I know who use them regularly seem to understand both sides of that tradeoff.

Agree wit you. I like coding and am pretty good about tracking down edge cases to handle, but am so so slow compared to the good programmers. Until now, the company's money (my time) was better spent on other necessary work.

I see it slightly differently. It "levels" up the poor programmers in the sense they can submit a ton of output that seems plausible to managers.

But it can also help Sr engineers, differently. They tend to use it in smaller, more tightly scoped use cases. Well scoped re-factoring, boilerplate stuff, improving personal tools, etc. The improvement is not nearly as visible or measurable to managers.

Why would it need to be erudite pinkie up critiqué?

Can't it be 404 throwing a little egg on google's face? Point out their shit smells every once in a while.

Yeah, there's no big revelation here. Just what you would expect the rank and file at a slopshop subjected to the current state of AI think of the slop when they ain't publicly shilling for the home team.

But pointing this all out is fine, especially when there's plenty of other coverage where everyone pretends like obvious open secrets aren't true unless a peer-reviewed meta-analysis proves it. And even then we should still give them the benefit of the doubt because maybe this time it's different.