Mastodawn

This is an example of someone who’s in deep denial and my New Year’s Resolution is not to debate productivity gains from using AI.

What was interesting is the comments are almost uniformly senior engineers with 10+ years of experience talking about how Claude Code debunks this thinking.

The hype is now reality when it comes to software engineering. The interesting discussion now is the ramifications.

Show thread

trisweb Feb 22

@carnage4life Both are wrong though? It’s not AGI, it’s also not useless; it can code but it also kinda can’t and needs someone who understands the code to oversee it. It’s… kind of just the next abstraction layer up on a good IDE. But it does work, it just isn’t AGI nor does it have the possibility of becoming AGI (hard confident). Nuance is hard?

Show thread

Frank Quednau Feb 22

@trisweb voila. I think it was Anil Dash who put it best—it’s the incredible hype machine around it. Yes it’s useful, but do you have to burn down your crown jewels (eg M365) for it? @carnage4life

Show thread

trisweb

@flq @carnage4life yep. I’m not even contending that it’s useful, or even net positive; just that it’s not useless.

That actually helps an argument against it being I.e. good for society, or worth investing huge sums of our GDP into. “It doesn’t work and it’s useless!” is an easily shot-down lie; “it does work, it’s just not worth the squeeze” is a rational argument people might go “hmmm” about.