At that point, why not just write the code yourself?
Writing the code is the fast and easy part once you know what you want to do. I use AI as a rubber duck to shorten that cycle, then write it myself.
Choosing the battles to pick is part of the skill at the moment.
I use AI for a lot of boiler plate, tedious tasks I can’t quite do a vim recording for, small targeted scripts.
The boilerplate argument is becoming quite old.
It’s basically just a translation, but with dozens of tables, each with dozens of columns it gets tedious pretty fast.
If given other files from the project as context it’s also pretty good at generating the table and column descriptions for documentation, which I would probably just not write at all if doing it by hand.
I think you need to imagine all the things you could be doing with LLMs.
For me the biggest thing is so many tedious things are now unlocked. Refactors that are just slightly beyond the IDE, checking your config (the number of typos it’s picked up that could take me hours because eyes can be stupid), data processing that’s similar to what you have done before but different enough to be annoying.
Doesn't that sound ridiculous to you?
Admittedly, part of it is my own desire for code that looks a certain way, not just that which solves the problem.
How do you verify it is teaching you the correct thing if you don't have any baseline to compare it to?
It's not AI, there is no intelligence. A language model as the name says deals with language. Current ones are surprisingly good at it but it's still not more than that.
I just don't enjoy the work as much as I did when was younger. Now I want to get things done and then spend the day on other more enjoyable (to me) stuff.
I’ve noticed colleagues who enjoy Claude code are more interested in “just ship it!” (and anecdotally are more extroverted than myself).
I find Claude code to be oddly unsatisfying. Still trying to put my finger on it, but I think it’s that I quickly lose context. Even if I understand the changes CC makes, it’s not the same as wrestling with a problem and hitting roadblocks and overcoming. With CC I have no bearing on whether I’m in an area of code with lots of room for error, or if I’m standing in the edge of a cliff and can’t cross some line in the design.
I’m way more concerned with understanding the design and avoiding future pain than my “ship it” colleagues (and anecdotally am way more introverted). I see what they build and, yes, it’s working, for now, but the table relationships aren’t right and this is going to have to be rebuilt later, except now it’s feeding a downstream report that’s being consumed by the business, so the beta version is now production. But the 20 other things this app touches indirectly weren’t part of the vibe coding context, so the design obviously doesn’t account for that. It could, but of course the “ship it” folks aren’t the ones that are going to build out lengthy requirements and scopes of work and document how a dozen systems relate to and interact with each other.
I guess I’m seeing that the speed limit of quality is still the speed of my understanding, and (maybe more importantly) that my weaponizing of my own obsession only works when I’m wrestling and overcoming, not just generating code as fast as possible.
I do wonder about the weaponized obsession. People will draw or play music obsessively, something about the intrinsic motivation of mastery, and having AI create the same drawing, or music, isn’t the same in terms of interest or engagement.
But I can’t tell you any useful tips or tricks to be honest. It’s like trying to teach a new driver the intuition of knowing when to brake or go when a traffic light turns yellow. There’s like nothing you can really say that will be that helpful.
Sure, some skills are more about practice, not rules, but hopefully you're not a driving instructor.
The funny thing is - we need less. Less of everything. But an up-tick in quality.
This seems to happen with humans with everything - the gates get opened, enabling a flood of producers to come in. But this causes a mountain of slop to form, and overtime the tastes of folks get eroded away.
Engineers don't need to write more lines of code / faster - they need to get better at interfacing with other folks in the business organisation and get better at project selection and making better choices over how to allocate their time. Writing lines of code is a tiny part of what it takes to get great products to market and to grow/sustain market share etc.
But hey, good luck with that - ones thinking power is diminished overtime by interacing with LLMs etc.
Sometimes I reflect on how much more efficiently I can learn (and thus create) new things because of these technologies, then get anxiety when I project that to everyone else being similarly more capable.
Then I read comments like this and remember that most people don't even want to try.
Come back and post here when you have built something that has commercial success.
Show us all how it's done.
Until then go away - more noise doesn't help.
I'm still the one doing the doing after the learning is complete.