4 ms·

It’s only a hard dependency if you don’t know and never learn how to program. For developers who read and understand the code being generated, the tool could g

It’s only a hard dependency if you don’t know and never learn how to program. For developers who read and understand the code being generated, the tool could go away and it would only slow you down, not block progress. And even if you don’t, it really isn’t a hard dependency on a particular tool. There are multiple competing tools and models to choose from, so if you can’t make progress with one, switch to another. There isn’t much lock-in to any specific tool.

iaw 1y ago
My experience has been that Claude can layout a lot of things in minutes that would take me hours if not days. Often I can dictate the precise logic and then claude get's most of the way there, with a little prompting claude can usually get even further. The amount of work I can get done is much more substantial than it used to be. I think there is a lot of reticence to adopt AI for coding but I'm seeing it as a step change for coding the way powerful calculators/workstation computers were for traditional engineering disciplines. The volume of work they were limited to using a slide rule was much lower than now with a computer.
latexr 1y ago
> For developers who read and understand the code being generated, the tool could go away and it would only slow you down Recent research suggests it would in fact speed you up. https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-os-dev-study/ https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...
- brokencode 1y ago
  Interestingly, devs felt that it sped them up even though it slowed them down in the study. So even if it’s not an actual productivity booster on individual tasks, perhaps it still could reduce cognitive load and possibly burnout in the long term. Either way, it’s a tool that devs should feel free to use or not use according to their preferences.
- bjclark 1y ago
  You should actually read the paper. N size of 16. Only 1 of which had used cursor more than 40 hours before. All people working in existing code bases where they were the primary author.
  - latexr 1y ago
    I did read the paper, and the HN discussion (which is how I found it). I recommend you read that, your comments were addressed. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44522772 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44522772
    - adi_kurian 1y ago
      Which of bjclark's specific points does the thread actually refute?

iaw 1y ago

My experience has been that Claude can layout a lot of things in minutes that would take me hours if not days. Often I can dictate the precise logic and then claude get's most of the way there, with a little prompting claude can usually get even further. The amount of work I can get done is much more substantial than it used to be. I think there is a lot of reticence to adopt AI for coding but I'm seeing it as a step change for coding the way powerful calculators/workstation computers were for traditional engineering disciplines. The volume of work they were limited to using a slide rule was much lower than now with a computer.

latexr 1y ago

> For developers who read and understand the code being generated, the tool could go away and it would only slow you down Recent research suggests it would in fact speed you up. https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-os-dev-study/ https://metr.org/blog/2025-07-10-early-2025-ai-experienced-o...

brokencode 1y ago
Interestingly, devs felt that it sped them up even though it slowed them down in the study. So even if it’s not an actual productivity booster on individual tasks, perhaps it still could reduce cognitive load and possibly burnout in the long term. Either way, it’s a tool that devs should feel free to use or not use according to their preferences.
bjclark 1y ago
You should actually read the paper. N size of 16. Only 1 of which had used cursor more than 40 hours before. All people working in existing code bases where they were the primary author.
- latexr 1y ago
  I did read the paper, and the HN discussion (which is how I found it). I recommend you read that, your comments were addressed. https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44522772 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44522772
  - adi_kurian 1y ago
    Which of bjclark's specific points does the thread actually refute?