5 ms·

I don't like calling a posture 'ignorant' , but I think that's what we have here. I don't mean that as an insult. It's likely you didn't learn how to use the t

I don't like calling a posture 'ignorant' , but I think that's what we have here. I don't mean that as an insult. It's likely you didn't learn how to use the tool properly, and I'd suggest 'trying again' because not using AI soon will be tantamount to digging holes with shovels instead of using construction equipment. Yes, we still need our 'core skill's but, we're not going to be able to live without the leverage of AI. Yes - AI can generate slop, and probably too many Engineers do that. Yes - you can 'feel a loss of control' but that's where you have to find your comfort zone. It's generally a bad idea to produce 'huge amounts of code' - unless it's perfectly consistent with a design, and he architecture is derived from well-known conventions. Start by using it as an 'assistant' aka research, fill in all the extra bits, and get your testing going. You'll probably want to guide the architecture, and at least keep an eye on the test code. Then it's a matter of how much further 'up' you can go, There are few situations in which we should be 'accepting' large amounts of code, but some of it can be reviewed quickly. The AI, already now in 2026 can write better code than you at the algorithmic level - it will be tight, clean, 'by the book' and far lesss likley to have erros. It fails at the architectural and modular level still, that will probably change. The AI 'makes a clean cut' in the wood, tighter to the line than any carpenter could - like a power tool. A carpenter that does not use power tools is an 'artisnal craft person' , not really building functional things. This is the era of motor cars, there is really no option - I don't say that because I'm pro or anti anything, AI is often way over-hyped - that's something else entirely. It's like the web / cloud etc. it's just 'imminent'. So try again, experiment, stay open minded.

sassymuffinz 7mo ago
Like I said I still use Copilot as needed, I just don't trust Claude to go off on its own and generate a mountain of technical debt that I can't 100% trust. To use your own analogy, there's plenty of carpenters still around for when someone needs something doing properly and bespoke, even though we can all go to Ikea, or any other flat pack furniture company, to get wobbly furniture cheaply at any time. I'd rather be the last carpenter charging a liveable wage, working on interesting problems for clients who appreciate a human touch than just pumping out mountains of slop to keep up with the broligarchy. If that makes me ignorant that's fine, but I'll be happily enjoying the craft while you're worrying about your metrics.
- bluegatty 7mo ago
  You're offering to deliver parcels by horse - thinking that somehow your 'delivering is better because it's more natural' and that your customers will appreciate it, over the 'smog' that the cars create. Or in other words - 'non existent'. It is arrogant and luddite to suggest that 'using AI is not doing it properly' or that anyone will care. They care that it's done well - that's it. FYI, the code that AI produces is probably better than what you produce - at least a functional level. 'Artisanility' is worthless in 'code' - there are no 'winding staircases' for us to custom build, as a master carpenter would. Where you can continue to 'write code by hand' is for very arcane, things, but even then you're still going to have to use AI for a lot of things in support of that. So if you want to get into compiler design - sure. But still - without mastery of AI, you'll be left behind. At least with horses, there's a naturalist component, with 'code' - nobody cares at all. There's zero interest in it, there's not 'organic' angle to sell.
  - eudamoniac 7mo ago
    I really don't understand why you people always say these things so matter of factly. I'd put a lot of money (and do, in the markets) on you being wrong. I'm pretty sure in ten years I will not have a problem keeping a software job without using AI.
    - sassymuffinz 7mo ago
      Maybe it's because of the environment they work in or their understanding of other people because of the business they're in. Your average 50 year old business owner doesn't understand AI at all and doesn't care to know, he's too busy thinking about getting a new order for 5000 widgets that he invented. What he needs is a website with inventory management, some sort of email marketing software, some sort of CRM, maybe a dashboard or something. What he wants to do is pick up the phone to someone and get them to take care of it for a reasonable price. AI is coming for programmers with no social skills, but it isn't coming for the human relationship side of the business where you need to have a few meetings to work out what they want to achieve, build a plan that works long term, have a call with other third parties or their vendors etc to alleviate pain points and then build a project around the business needs that won't crash every five minutes and leak their internal information because Claude decided security was optional. Half my job is understanding what they need and then instead of accepting their original scope, building a brand new scope in collaboration with them to fit the business needs long term. If one of these guys just wants to plow the original scope into Claude and let it rip then the customer isn't getting what they need.
000ooo000 7mo ago
>It's likely you didn't learn how to use the tool properly Yeah this gets rolled out every time. Boosters love to pitch LLM dev as some difficult, new 'skill' that must be learned, mastered, revered.
- bluegatty 7mo ago
  New tools and techniques have to be learned. The entire industry is moving towards integrating these new platforms, because they obviously work. It's perfectly reasonable to find problems with AI use, perfectly reasonable to 'not actually want' to use it, but it's basically irresponsible to reject the notion outright.

sassymuffinz 7mo ago

Like I said I still use Copilot as needed, I just don't trust Claude to go off on its own and generate a mountain of technical debt that I can't 100% trust. To use your own analogy, there's plenty of carpenters still around for when someone needs something doing properly and bespoke, even though we can all go to Ikea, or any other flat pack furniture company, to get wobbly furniture cheaply at any time. I'd rather be the last carpenter charging a liveable wage, working on interesting problems for clients who appreciate a human touch than just pumping out mountains of slop to keep up with the broligarchy. If that makes me ignorant that's fine, but I'll be happily enjoying the craft while you're worrying about your metrics.

bluegatty 7mo ago
You're offering to deliver parcels by horse - thinking that somehow your 'delivering is better because it's more natural' and that your customers will appreciate it, over the 'smog' that the cars create. Or in other words - 'non existent'. It is arrogant and luddite to suggest that 'using AI is not doing it properly' or that anyone will care. They care that it's done well - that's it. FYI, the code that AI produces is probably better than what you produce - at least a functional level. 'Artisanility' is worthless in 'code' - there are no 'winding staircases' for us to custom build, as a master carpenter would. Where you can continue to 'write code by hand' is for very arcane, things, but even then you're still going to have to use AI for a lot of things in support of that. So if you want to get into compiler design - sure. But still - without mastery of AI, you'll be left behind. At least with horses, there's a naturalist component, with 'code' - nobody cares at all. There's zero interest in it, there's not 'organic' angle to sell.
- eudamoniac 7mo ago
  I really don't understand why you people always say these things so matter of factly. I'd put a lot of money (and do, in the markets) on you being wrong. I'm pretty sure in ten years I will not have a problem keeping a software job without using AI.
  - sassymuffinz 7mo ago
    Maybe it's because of the environment they work in or their understanding of other people because of the business they're in. Your average 50 year old business owner doesn't understand AI at all and doesn't care to know, he's too busy thinking about getting a new order for 5000 widgets that he invented. What he needs is a website with inventory management, some sort of email marketing software, some sort of CRM, maybe a dashboard or something. What he wants to do is pick up the phone to someone and get them to take care of it for a reasonable price. AI is coming for programmers with no social skills, but it isn't coming for the human relationship side of the business where you need to have a few meetings to work out what they want to achieve, build a plan that works long term, have a call with other third parties or their vendors etc to alleviate pain points and then build a project around the business needs that won't crash every five minutes and leak their internal information because Claude decided security was optional. Half my job is understanding what they need and then instead of accepting their original scope, building a brand new scope in collaboration with them to fit the business needs long term. If one of these guys just wants to plow the original scope into Claude and let it rip then the customer isn't getting what they need.

000ooo000 7mo ago

>It's likely you didn't learn how to use the tool properly Yeah this gets rolled out every time. Boosters love to pitch LLM dev as some difficult, new 'skill' that must be learned, mastered, revered.

bluegatty 7mo ago
New tools and techniques have to be learned. The entire industry is moving towards integrating these new platforms, because they obviously work. It's perfectly reasonable to find problems with AI use, perfectly reasonable to 'not actually want' to use it, but it's basically irresponsible to reject the notion outright.