>LLMs are not going to allow you to do advanced programming if you couldn't already do it by hand. This is simply false. I have empirically already seen many p

>LLMs are not going to allow you to do advanced programming if you couldn't already do it by hand. This is simply false. I have empirically already seen many people get LLMs to write code they couldn't do by hand in any reasonable time frame. ("Let me take a 3 month course on Python and then get back to writing this pandas script by hand" is not a reasonable time frame when your competition can pump it out for you in 30 seconds.) Some of these people go on to learn how to code themselves, but others are perfectly happy with treating the results they're currently getting as a black box. LLMs are a force multiplier on general productivity moreso than they are on programming ability specifically. >[I]t would be economically very valuable, and you can bet that functionality is not going to be casually enabled in LLMs But nothing else in the world works like this. An economically very valuable thing is, almost by definition, something with a lot of demand for it. That's like saying Excel would be so valuable if only it could do math, so of course Microsoft isn't going to put a calculator into its spreadsheet program.