If agent did all the technical work of sending a rocket to the moon, and all that was left for me was deciding whether a rocket to the moon should be built or one to mars, which is better for our “customers” and I actually enjoyed that then I would be honest and say I was never into technology, which is completely fine, majority of humanity isn’t into it.

I don’t need to see why you feel the desperate need to larp as a technologist when you’re happy with letting an agent solve all the technical problems.

You only think it is rude because you have tied your identity to being a technologist when you are not, I’m just saying it like it is.

▲

RHSeeger 3 hours ago | parent | next [-]

> I don’t need to see why you feel the desperate need to larp as a technologist when you’re happy with letting an agent solve all the technical problems.

This is a false comparison. Agents cannot solve all the technical problems, so the entire statement falls apart.

▲

bah9 2 hours ago | parent [-]

What techical problems agent can't solve exactly?

	▲	erulabs 40 minutes ago \| parent [-]
		agents are very very far from being able to send rockets to the moon just because you prompt them to.

▲

Apocryphon 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

You’re overlooking that the point of technology- and technologists- is to ultimately serve customers. The pleasure is incidental.

▲

CooCooCaCha 3 hours ago | parent [-]

The point of technology is to make people’s lives better.

Out of curiosity, when you take a bite of a burger do you call it a product?

When you watch a movie do you call it content?

	▲	Apocryphon 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		What you and I are saying is synonymous. I’m simply reusing language that the post I’m responding to used. And also de-glamorizing/de-romanticizing things a bit, sure. And given that fast food is the pinnacle of sustenance as a product and Hollywood has been content-brained since 1977, sure!