• it_depends_man@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 month ago

    Remember that story about the chalk mark engineer with Ford? Chalk mark 1$, knowing where to mark 1000$ ? Same with code. “Code” is easy. Knowing what to write, why and where, that’s the hard part. LLMs have somehow managed to automate the code part, without the abstraction, at least in an error proof way. I don’t think “coding isn’t that hard” is insulting, and I don’t use C++ because I think it’s hard. But it’s not because writing something is hard, it’s because writing precisely what is needed is hard.

    Anyway, this debate doesn’t matter, negotiate better, be active politically to ban stuff or not, complaining on the internet won’t do anyone any good. I know you’re emotionally invested in this, just… breathe and do something else? Idk. Also I’m not your enemy on this, so no need to attack me.

  • Zedstrian@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    1 month ago

    Whoever you are, don’t outsource your understanding, judgement, empathy and taste to AI. Don’t abdicate your responsibility. Don’t be a meat proxy.

    By expanding the ability to program to people without the knowledge of how that code works in the first place, it’s naive to expect that most uses of AI in programming will be informed uses by senior developers able to recognize errors and security flaws.

    Such a pro-AI position also ignores the enormous amount of theft that these tools are built on.