The reason it's considered (by many) acceptable to churn/sling/vibe code using AI is largely due to how we frame development in respect to design. We consider design thinking as both innately human and a non-technical code-free occupation. We think of developers as machines who only encode design.
If developers get replaced by AI, it's only because we dehumanised them already. And the development itself *will* get worse. Because the best developers actually think deeply about their work.
@hadon @heydon “Humans will take care of the creative part while using AI as a tool that will do the tedious part.”
This is a dangerous fallacy. Humans are creative *because* of the tedious parts. Automating away tedium reduces creativity because our brains don't go from 0 to 100. You putter around and do “boring” tasks for a while, until you get an epiphany. No boring tasks, far fewer epiphanies. Far less learning.
I respect tedium. Assign me that boring task and I'll give you gold in return.
Large Heydon Collider
NoBorg
Jared White (ResistanceNet ✊)