> it's someone who's more "code-naive" and might get anxious about approving random bash script commands they don't recognize.

Maybe they should trust their instinct and not mess with things they don’t care to understand

It’s a brave new world.

I recall hearing similar sentiments from linux sysadmins regarding cloud infrastructure. In many respects they were and continue to be correct. In other respects, the world doesn’t care about the loss in understanding as long as things work “well enough” for the cogs of society to keep turning.

For those who do care (and have the aptitude) to understand things deeper there is always work to be had when “well enough” stops being good enough and someone has to unravel the “RDS queries are taking too long” problems that crop up as a result.

What an awful position to take. Tech used to be about becoming more accessible to people! now we have a magical assistant to make computers do what you want with natural language, and your desire is gate keeping that so only programmers can use it to write software for themselves?

I am using many many many things that I don't understand. Cars, public transport, etc...

I review and test the end product, not every tiny step along the way. If the LLM uses some command line tools I have never heard of to create a model I can verify, why should I learn a tool that is completely irrelevant to my core expertise?