The argument isn’t to not use better materials or techniques, it’s that inferior materials and techniques are fine because they don’t impact the end result, which is so obviously false when it comes to pretty much anything, but supposedly true when it comes to software.

▲

estearum 5 hours ago | parent [-]

I'm not sure who you saw arguing for inferior materials and techniques, but let me know when you find them.

What you saw in this thread was someone arguing against the dimensions of "impressiveness" and "crassness" as valid things to care about when it comes to code.

It's your mistake to assume that those are related to any meaningful concept of actual quality.

	▲	dofm 5 hours ago \| parent [-]
		FWIW I never suggested that they were indicative of problems with the code. Unimpressive, crass code can run, after all. I clearly said elsewhere that I think they are predictive of problems with the person who writes it, and I fear I can generalise that to LLM tooling that generates it.