Please read the full paragraph for the answer instead of cherry picking a quote for a knee-jerk reaction:

> Be curious, try the new tools, test the latest models. To not do so is silly. > [...] > you could delay adopting “the cloud” for a couple of years and survive. With AI you might get a few months. The way we work has already changed, and it’s not changing back as far as I can tell.

▲

weakfish an hour ago | parent | next [-]

> you could delay adopting “the cloud” for a couple of years and survive. With AI you might get a few months.

I really dislike these claims that act like they know the future of engineering, that they’ve been let in on some enlightenment that we haven’t been. What’s going to happen in a few months? Is Sam Altman going to nuke my house from orbit? Or is it because my CTO is going to fire me for not using AI? If it’s the latter, that’s not a curiosity problem, that’s a “there’s a gun to my head” problem.

▲

Trasmatta an hour ago | parent [-]

It seems to be based on some idea that there's no way you can be productive enough without AI. But I've yet to see any companies really shipping meaningful software at some unprecedented speed that was not possible pre-AI. Instead, I see a lot of half baked features and buggy apps. I am not convinced that those that choose to either NOT use AI or use it more sparingly / judiciously (my preference), are somehow going to be "left in the dust".

▲

weakfish an hour ago | parent [-]

Yeah, I’ll second that. I see folks moving _fast_, but boy oh boy are they breaking things (or delivering something that never worked) which if anything makes _me_ slower lol

	▲	Trasmatta 16 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		And also delivering things nobody wants or will use, just because they can.

▲

Trasmatta 2 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

I read the entire paragraph, and the entire article. Nothing in there explained to me why every engineer should be using AI every day.

	▲	elxr 40 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		Because I don't think that's the point of the article, which is just a commentary about how AI labs are marketing the effectiveness of their services by using terms like "8x more code per quarter" like that's an obvious good thing (which it isn't). If you want a more in depth explanation, go look for interviews with devs who were already super-productive before LLMs and now came around to using them everyday.