In case you yourself do not own a table saw, I should point out that table saws don't rip, cut, or mill stock for you. It's like saying "buying a hammer doesn't make you a carpenter".
At what point does whacking something together yourself with a hammer make you a carpenter? You would think that even with carpentry there is a spectrum from ignorant rube to master craftsman. If you fire and forget a LLM agent at a problem, where does that land you on the spectrum?
It doesn't, it's just that people keep making comparisons between AI and basic tools of specific trades, but none of those tools work the way AI does.
(I mean, I guess as soon as you start whacking things together with a hammer, you technically sort of are being a carpenter, but that's not the point.)
Capability? I have to push back on that (AI sounding joke, yes).
Point is, if I give a person a calculator, it doesn't even make them the tiniest bit of a mathematician. Nor if I give them a pencil, either. The tool never, ever makes the tradesperson.
Whatever's happening with LLMs, it's not making people programmers. It's how you use the tool, which validates that.
My criteria is very simple, could you handwrite the code if you needed to. Could you write this code without the LLM writing it for you. Could you write this code without the IDE auto-completing it for you. You could take it all the way to, could you write the assembly if you needed to. Of course, the complexity of the ask and the timeline has to be commensurate with the power of your tooling at each level.
Whatever you can accomplish using AI without experience is now worthless. Sure that rando can now get a customized website hosted on Vercel with some struggling through setting up GitHub etc. That work is no longer interesting. It’s slop the same as a restaurant showing AI images of food. It’s digital plastic. AI on autopilot creating code, text, images or video is nothing more than a curiosity.
I've been using Claude to plan out some personal projects, and at first it seems like it can do anything!
But as I've used it, I've noticed that it overcomplicates everything and often even forgets what it previously said, and makes decisions that contradict it.
The AIs need a firm guiding hand, like a lead developer would give junior and mid-level programmers, and even occasionally to a senior developer that went off the rails for personal obsessions.
For instance, I was just trying to have it make a simple shopping list app. I had Claude take my old shopping info from the Google Keep list we use (it keeps the old checked-off items) and get the latest grocery ad, and produce a list of suggestions. It was amazing! I decided I want to send that info to a server, have a checklist there, and then keep the info for later so the AI could do it again.
After a lot of questioning (via Matt Pocock's skills, which are great) it was so complicated I finally yelled at it for overcomplicating everything, and told it how simple I wanted it to be, again.
It kept insisting on IDs for products, IDs for stores, IDs for store sections... Even after I told it no IDs. I finally said it a few more times in different ways.
It's finally getting back to the simple webapp that I imagined. It needed a lot of handholding to get it there.
And it's the kind of thing I would see from devs that were inflexible and had to see things a certain way.
I'm not ruling out that it could eventually get over this phase, but I have a feeling it'll always be something that needs handling.
My other project right now was naturally complex, and needed a lot of that stuff, and things have been going better, but I still correct it rather a lot, even on things I'd previously told it.
Including software developers. Mathematicians tops unless the touch something outside code. An engine is literally multiple disciplines in one. I tired of SDs thinking they are engineers without touching hardware.
I've noticed a near 1:1 overlap of people who advocate against shadow development, and people experiencing status anxiety about the fact that AI has proven that they barely pass the bar.
Some arguments about shadow development and IT are valid, like security and who takes ownership after the original developers leave, but they don't really account for the reality that organizations expand constantly, business needs are perpetually exploding and most development shops are so mired in business requirements and bureaucracy that there's genuinely no value involved with interacting with them.
Although AI substantially changes the situation the hard part of being an engineer was never the code.
A technician is defined by the tools they work with, an engineer is defined by the problems they can solve.
Taking a dozen different business processes and stakeholders and figuring out how to actually solve the problems they have is engineering.
There's lots of caveats asterisks & limitations, sure sure sure: we hear you Technically Correct repliers, here to spread your Well Actually naysayings.
But at the end of the day: heck yes. So much heck yes. Even if you are not engineering well, just the ability to have your agent go in and do reconissance of systems. "Reverse engineer this Bluetooth protocol for my device" or what I'm doing now, "reverse engineer my epaper display controller"... People have an incredibly powerful tool for assessing the world, for finding out.
And I for one strongly believe that will beget the great virous circle of lovely lovely fucking around. A wheel that is humanity's best invention, best motivation, best traction, best side, and one that any self proclaimed Hacker if any spirit ought be out of their seats cheering raving with excitement happy for.
Anyone can buy a table saw. Doesn't make you a carpenter and it doesn't mean you can/should build anything.
In case you yourself do not own a table saw, I should point out that table saws don't rip, cut, or mill stock for you. It's like saying "buying a hammer doesn't make you a carpenter".
At what point does whacking something together yourself with a hammer make you a carpenter? You would think that even with carpentry there is a spectrum from ignorant rube to master craftsman. If you fire and forget a LLM agent at a problem, where does that land you on the spectrum?
It doesn't, it's just that people keep making comparisons between AI and basic tools of specific trades, but none of those tools work the way AI does.
(I mean, I guess as soon as you start whacking things together with a hammer, you technically sort of are being a carpenter, but that's not the point.)
Or, in the words of Morris Day, "It takes more than a hat to call yourself a chef."
More people have the capability now, but not necessarily the experience or understanding.
The hat : chef analogy is even less apposite than the table saw! At least the table saw serves an important function in that trade.
Capability? I have to push back on that (AI sounding joke, yes).
Point is, if I give a person a calculator, it doesn't even make them the tiniest bit of a mathematician. Nor if I give them a pencil, either. The tool never, ever makes the tradesperson.
Whatever's happening with LLMs, it's not making people programmers. It's how you use the tool, which validates that.
The first step in becoming a carpenter is to become a bad carpenter.
I cannot disagree here in theory; but to say that: "The first step to become a doctor is NOT to be a bad doctor, its to go to medical school"
[delayed]
My criteria is very simple, could you handwrite the code if you needed to. Could you write this code without the LLM writing it for you. Could you write this code without the IDE auto-completing it for you. You could take it all the way to, could you write the assembly if you needed to. Of course, the complexity of the ask and the timeline has to be commensurate with the power of your tooling at each level.
Yeah, right.
That usually requires a 3 to 5 year degree, and possibly professional exam.
Having the AI do the work doesn't make one an engineer.
Just like one doesn't become a writer by owning a typewriter or a word processor.
Among other reasons, one doesn't become a writer by owning a typewriter because typewriters don't write for you.
How about owning a typewriter that types on its own?
That makes the typewriter the actual writer and you the credit-taker, just like in present ghostwriting arrangements
Still doesn't make you a writer.
And in civilized countries you need like 10 years of professional mentorship after the degree.
Whatever you can accomplish using AI without experience is now worthless. Sure that rando can now get a customized website hosted on Vercel with some struggling through setting up GitHub etc. That work is no longer interesting. It’s slop the same as a restaurant showing AI images of food. It’s digital plastic. AI on autopilot creating code, text, images or video is nothing more than a curiosity.
"Everyone is an engineer" sounds like something you hear right before a building collapses and kills 300 people
Ah yeah, if I ask a company to design and build me a bridge, I'm a bridge engineer!
I've been using Claude to plan out some personal projects, and at first it seems like it can do anything!
But as I've used it, I've noticed that it overcomplicates everything and often even forgets what it previously said, and makes decisions that contradict it.
The AIs need a firm guiding hand, like a lead developer would give junior and mid-level programmers, and even occasionally to a senior developer that went off the rails for personal obsessions.
For instance, I was just trying to have it make a simple shopping list app. I had Claude take my old shopping info from the Google Keep list we use (it keeps the old checked-off items) and get the latest grocery ad, and produce a list of suggestions. It was amazing! I decided I want to send that info to a server, have a checklist there, and then keep the info for later so the AI could do it again.
After a lot of questioning (via Matt Pocock's skills, which are great) it was so complicated I finally yelled at it for overcomplicating everything, and told it how simple I wanted it to be, again.
It kept insisting on IDs for products, IDs for stores, IDs for store sections... Even after I told it no IDs. I finally said it a few more times in different ways.
It's finally getting back to the simple webapp that I imagined. It needed a lot of handholding to get it there.
And it's the kind of thing I would see from devs that were inflexible and had to see things a certain way.
I'm not ruling out that it could eventually get over this phase, but I have a feeling it'll always be something that needs handling.
My other project right now was naturally complex, and needed a lot of that stuff, and things have been going better, but I still correct it rather a lot, even on things I'd previously told it.
Including software developers. Mathematicians tops unless the touch something outside code. An engine is literally multiple disciplines in one. I tired of SDs thinking they are engineers without touching hardware.
I've noticed a near 1:1 overlap of people who advocate against shadow development, and people experiencing status anxiety about the fact that AI has proven that they barely pass the bar.
Some arguments about shadow development and IT are valid, like security and who takes ownership after the original developers leave, but they don't really account for the reality that organizations expand constantly, business needs are perpetually exploding and most development shops are so mired in business requirements and bureaucracy that there's genuinely no value involved with interacting with them.
is it going to be like YouTube, where everyone was a video artist suddenly?
Yes comrade, we are all equalizing for three people to become multi-trillionaires.
The level of propaganda reaches Maoist proportions.
COBOL
Visual Basic
Low-Code
Power Platform
Although AI substantially changes the situation the hard part of being an engineer was never the code.
A technician is defined by the tools they work with, an engineer is defined by the problems they can solve. Taking a dozen different business processes and stakeholders and figuring out how to actually solve the problems they have is engineering.
Hack the planet!
There's lots of caveats asterisks & limitations, sure sure sure: we hear you Technically Correct repliers, here to spread your Well Actually naysayings.
But at the end of the day: heck yes. So much heck yes. Even if you are not engineering well, just the ability to have your agent go in and do reconissance of systems. "Reverse engineer this Bluetooth protocol for my device" or what I'm doing now, "reverse engineer my epaper display controller"... People have an incredibly powerful tool for assessing the world, for finding out.
And I for one strongly believe that will beget the great virous circle of lovely lovely fucking around. A wheel that is humanity's best invention, best motivation, best traction, best side, and one that any self proclaimed Hacker if any spirit ought be out of their seats cheering raving with excitement happy for.