In fact, this garbage blogspam should go on the AI coding community that was made specifically because the subscribers of the programming community didn’t want it here.
This article may mention AI coding but I made a very considered decision to post it in here because the primary focus is the author’s relationship to programming, and hence worth sharing with the wider programming community.
Considering how many people have voted this up, I would take that as a sign I posted it in the appropriate community. If you don’t feel this post is appropriate in this community, I’m happy to discuss that.
I think there’s room for people to try to grapple with the fact that, for good or ill, the industry is being impacted by LLM code assistants right now in a significant way. That doesn’t mean this isn’t a tech craze, or a flash in the pan, or a hype bubble that has gotten huge. And whether or not the bubble pops, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that code writing tools comparable to what we have now will be around for awhile, again for good or ill. This seems like a dev grappling, not sneaky AI booster bullshit.
This seems like a dev grappling, not sneaky AI booster bullshit.
I could agree with you if this poster hadn’t posted a very similar article the previous day, or if the writer wasn’t saying “I’m now an architect for a fleet of agents” which is definitely AI booster bullshit.
What I’m saying is the post is broadly about programming, and how that has changed over the decades, so I posted it in the community I thought was most appropriate.
If you’re arguing that articles posted in this community can’t discuss AI and its impact on programming, then that’s something you’ll need to take up with the moderators.
If I thought it was against the rules I’d report it instead of complaining. I complain because posting “I’m sad because everything is different now and also I’m all in in the hype actually” blogs 2 days in a row after agreeing not to post AI hype sure seems like you desperately want to post AI hype.
This article may mention AI coding but I made a very considered decision to post it in here because the primary focus is the author’s relationship to programming, and hence worth sharing with the wider programming community.
Considering how many people have voted this up, I would take that as a sign I posted it in the appropriate community. If you don’t feel this post is appropriate in this community, I’m happy to discuss that.
You made a very considered decision that you could argue it’s not technically AI booster bullshit, you mean.
I think there’s room for people to try to grapple with the fact that, for good or ill, the industry is being impacted by LLM code assistants right now in a significant way. That doesn’t mean this isn’t a tech craze, or a flash in the pan, or a hype bubble that has gotten huge. And whether or not the bubble pops, I don’t think it’s unreasonable to think that code writing tools comparable to what we have now will be around for awhile, again for good or ill. This seems like a dev grappling, not sneaky AI booster bullshit.
I could agree with you if this poster hadn’t posted a very similar article the previous day, or if the writer wasn’t saying “I’m now an architect for a fleet of agents” which is definitely AI booster bullshit.
What I’m saying is the post is broadly about programming, and how that has changed over the decades, so I posted it in the community I thought was most appropriate.
If you’re arguing that articles posted in this community can’t discuss AI and its impact on programming, then that’s something you’ll need to take up with the moderators.
If I thought it was against the rules I’d report it instead of complaining. I complain because posting “I’m sad because everything is different now and also I’m all in in the hype actually” blogs 2 days in a row after agreeing not to post AI hype sure seems like you desperately want to post AI hype.