|
Top-level
 I would not call any user of “AI” a programmer. If you know what you're doing, you don't need it; it's useless to you. If you care about the quality of your work, it's actively harmful to your efforts, and you want it as far away from your project as possible. 3 comments
@narinarinari @argv_minus_one @AuthorJMac computer science type chiming in: there is actually a lot of creativity involved in engineering (including progamming). This is exactly where LLMs fail in our field as well, being imaginative how to solve a problem. They are fine (and just that) when querying well known problems, but I have yet to see an useful usage of AI there. If a tool can help you reduce the boring parts (and automate them), its good. @brahms @argv_minus_one @AuthorJMac The thing is, I'm sure programming requires creativity -- but I've also lived through the last twenty years, and have seen how that creativity is used in practice to create the most boring, ugly, user-hating money siphons possible. Creative technology was supposed to liberate us, and instead it's made every aspect of modern life not directly related to making money markedly worse. Generative AI is more of the same. |
Gregory's Server
@argv_minus_one @AuthorJMac
My point wasn't to say that people who use AI are programmers -- it's that, by and large, the people using and enthusing endlessly about Generative AI, including business types and computer science types, aren't creative people. As you say -- creative people don't need it. I'm just adding that uncreative people use it as an ersatz replacement for real creativity.