3 ms·
Part of the issue is that I think you are underestimating the number of people not doing "advanced" programming. If it's around ~80-90%, then that's a lot of +1
by NewsaHackO 11mo ago
Part of the issue is that I think you are underestimating the number of people not doing "advanced" programming. If it's around ~80-90%, then that's a lot of +1s for AI
- deleted 11mo ago[deleted]
- whoknowsidont 11mo agoWhy do you feel like I'm underestimating the # of people not doing advanced programming?
- NewsaHackO 11mo agoTheoretically, if AI can do 80-90% of programming jobs (the ones not in the "advanced" group), that would be an unequivocal +1 for AI.
- whoknowsidont 11mo agoI think you're crossing some threads here.
- NewsaHackO 11mo ago"It's not. And if your team is doing this you're not "advanced." Lots of people are outing themselves these days about the complexity of their jobs, or lack thereof. Which is great! But it's not a +1 for AI, it's a -1 for them. " Is you, right?
- whoknowsidont 11mo agoYes. You can see my name on the post.
- NewsaHackO 11mo agoOK, just making sure. Have a blessed day :)
- friendzis 11mo agoWrong. 80% of code not being advanced is quite strictly not the same as 80% people not doing advanced programming.
- NewsaHackO 10mo agoI completely understand the difference, and I am standing by my statement that 80-90% of programmers are not doing advanced programming at all.