@viticci I think your take is missing that many software engineers view their code like you view your writing.

Art comes in more forms than prose/drawings/music. It's anytime someone is using their perspective to introduce something new into the world.

AI has no perspective.

Also, lots of code is understood in it's "raw form" - there's a huge open source movement where the code does matter.

@stroughtonsmith @viticci if the underlying code doesn't matter, are developers just collaborating on writing AI prompts?

I'd rather write code!

@viticci @stroughtonsmith if the developer is now the conductor, I'd like to consider what happens to software engineering (programming + time + collaborators).

Does the orchestra now have 10 conductors? That can't work.

@bigzaphod gotta do the entire Beige Volvo Trilogy now: Con Air, The Rock, and Face/Off.

Truly the golden age of cage.

@stroughtonsmith aside from the already well documented downsides to AI, I am not sure how I would feel about putting my name to software created through AI.

For one, I like solving technical problems, and I like writing code. I'm not sure I'd get the same satisfaction from prompt engineering (though again, I have not tried it).

Is it just that it is a means to an end in order to get e.g. the Windows apps? Do you feel an attachment to this code too?

@stroughtonsmith (I haven't used and don't plan to use Codex or similar):

To me this argument reads like your software architecture is irrelevant to you, almost the "AI is the compiler" ideas I keep seeing.

If you aren't reading the code, how do you understand the maintainability of it, and what do you do when the inevitable bugs occur? I find debugging my own code much easier than someone else's, never mind something written by something with no perspective/logic/reasoning.