LLM coding assistants didn't create a split between craft-lovers and make-it-go developers. They revealed one that was always there.
For craft-lovers, what's being bypassed isn't the output but the act itself. Marx called this separation from the act of production. But the alienation isn't coming from the LLM. It's coming from a market that penalizes whoever produces output more slowly.
This is a damn good article, and really makes me think about where I fall on the spectrum.
I didn't have to think very hard, I side firmly with Lawson.
I firmly believe that code is a craft, and I take pride in the time spent writing the code, not just in the product itself.
I mourn the impending loss of that kind of counter-culture approach to programming. Which is ironic because I don't think it's even the mainstream way of looking at coding... most devs I know would side with Orchard. Coding is a means to an end.
I too consider coding, generally, a means to an end.
However, in software development, isn't often the real problem to find out *what precisely* is the end?
"Bugs" can result from perfectly coded software if you haven't fully considered that what you really, *really* want is zig a zig ah.
洪 民憙 (Hong Minhee) 
julian
Sibrosan