> When IDEs first emerged in the world of web development, many developers proudly claimed that a simple text editor was all they needed. For them, saying "I'm using Notepad / VIM" became a badge of honor, symbolizing their minimalist approach.
Whenever some new technology is being sold, someone always tries to delegitimize any criticism by citing some superficially similar criticism of some past technology that was adopted. Or, fairly frequently, they just reflexively cite Socrates's/Plato's OG critique of writing.
> Today, I sense a similar mindset among those who oppose AI assistants in software development. They tend to focus on the perceived limitations of these tools, often failing to see the bigger picture of how AI can enhance productivity. Instead, they quickly latch onto any shortcoming to justify their resistance, missing the potential long-term benefits.
So your message is: "Who are you going to believe, the sales pitch or your own lying eyes? You should focus on selling yourself on the new thing."
I think you should listen to the criticism, and try to understand and empathize with it instead of trying to dismiss and disregard it. There's something there. Maybe the people who critique it are the careful and thoughtful developers, and the ones who sing its praises are the sloppy ones who aren't careful enough to see the problems or just don't care (e.g. the kind who see their job as closing tickets not writing working software)?
Maybe this thing will get adopted despite its shortcomings and change everything, like NFTs did, but that doesn't mean those shortcomings aren't important.