Nobody knows how to build with AI yet

I know it's an analogy that's probably been done to death already, but it truly feels like Bitcoin 2.0.

Back in the Bitcoin hype days, there were new posts here every single day about the latest and greatest Bitcoin thing. Everyone was using it. It was going to take over the world. Remember all the people on this very site that sincerely thought fiat currency was going away and we'd be doing all of our transactions with Bitcoin? How'd that work out?

It feels exactly the same. Now the big claims are that coding jobs are going away, or if you at least don't use it you'll be left behind. People are posting AI stories every day. Everyone is using it. People say it's going to transform the industry.

Back then there was greater motivation to evangelize Bitcoin, as you could get rich by convincing people to buy in, and it's just to a lesser degree now. People who work for AI companies (like the author), posting AI stuff, trying to drum up more people to give them views/clicks, buy their products.

And of course you'll have people replying to this trying to make the case for why AI coding is already a thing, when in reality those posts are once again going to be carbon copies of similar comments from the Bitcoin days "hey, you're wrong, I bought pizza with Bitcoin last night, it's already taking over, bud!"

My feelings exactly. For a while I thought I was missing out and then I started learning how(and why) it works and I thought it was interesting but greatly over-hyped, exactly like bitcoin was.

I tried to follow the hype and generate an application but it took a lot of time and it did generate something but not something that works with many subtle bugs. Now it may be that I needed to prompt it better, but that response also feels similar to how Scrum is always "done wrong" when it doesn't work. The result started getting better when I got more and more detailed with my prompts and then I realized that I am about to start writing code as a prompt and I may as well write the code myself.

So I still think it's an interesting tool, and it will automate away certain industries but no where near what the advertising is implying.

peeThe difference is Bitcoin is a networked system. Bitcoin is useless if I use it and you/my landlord/stores/the taxman doesn't. If my pizza store doesn't take Bitcoin, I can't use my Bitcoin. Meanwhile, LLM assisted programming has value to its adherents without needing you/my landlord/stores/the taxman to even have heard of it. My time machine is just as good as yours, so I have no idea if OpenAI, specifically is going to be around in 10 years, but I can tell you that I'll still have deepseek-r1.ggml

The difference is that Bitcoin was an overhyped solution looking for a problem.

Whereas AI is as big as life, eukaryotes, multi-cellularity, human intelligence, agriculture and the industrial revolution. It will certainly change everything (and make humans go extinct unless we are very careful).

Dismissing any new technology because of Bitcoin makes exactly as much sense as dismissing any new medical advancements because of Theranos. Ok, some people said Bitcoin would change the world, and they were wrong. Some people also said the PC, Internet, and smartphones would change the world, and they were right.

And of course you'll have people replying to this trying to make the case for why AI coding is already a thing, when in reality those posts are once again going to be carbon copies of similar comments from the Bitcoin days

What is the actual argument here? Anyone claiming that AI has been useful for them is a lying shill?