Is it though? He's more of a gushing torrent of anti-AI propaganda. He has an agenda too, it's just the opposite one.
My professional opinion is that LLM technology doesn't work very well for software development and I'm not interested in hemming and hawing over its supposed benefits any longer.
This comment is so obviously false (in my experience) I'm wondering what sort of niche environment you're working in
This is less agreeable. You kind of just made statements without even having claims (even without requirement of evidence or details) to back them up.
This is like the illusion of contribution.
i have yet to have an LLM beat me. i am forced to try regularly so i don't look like an AI anti at a company that is very much SV pilled
Some developers work better with LLMs in their workflows than others. Some problems are easier for LLMs to generate a reasonable solution for than others. Some folks prompt minimally and see what the vibes bring. Others start with a detailed architecture and implementation plan.
The individual results will depend quite a lot on the person, the problem, and the approach. It's not a guaranteed winning formula for everyone.
This is pretty rude!
He said his version of this observation is "your agents are only as good as you are." I think he's right, and the key is to practice and build the skill.
that doesn't sound like a net benefit at all. I think mostly people just enjoy playing with these toys, and good developers are still good with them, bad developers still bad
I am sympathetic to some of his criticisms that the enthusiasm and financial commitment has run far ahead what can be delivered. But I don't quite share his intensity over the doom and gloom. There probably will be a correction. It will probably sting. But I don't expect it to be the near wipe-out that Ed's passionate voice seems to steer towards.