So funny to read how people attack author using non-related to the essay’s message criticism.
My coworkers that are in love with this new world are producing complete AI slop and still take ages to complete tasks. Meanwhile I can finally play my strength as I actually know software architecture, can ask the LLM to consider important corner case and so on.
Plus, I am naturally good at context management. Being neurodivergent has given me decades of practice in working with entities that have a different way of thinking that me own. I have more mechanical empathy for the LLM because I don't confuse it for a human. My coworkers meanwhile get super frustrated that the LLM can not read their mind.
That said, LLMs are getting better. My advantage will not last. And the more AI slop gets produced the more we need LLMs to cope with all the AI slop in our code bases. A vicious cycle. No one will actually know what the code does. Soon my job will mostly consist of praying to the machine gods.
I don't think anyone is complaining about that too much. I wonder how many people there are like you, where we don't get much data. If people don't complain about it, we generally don't hear about it, because they're just quietly moving on with their work.
Not to be confused with the AI hypesters who are loudly touting the benefits with dubious claims, of course (:
Though I don't think this is at play here. Maybe a bit but seeing how my coworkers prompt, there is objective difference. I will spend half an hour on writing a good prompt, revise the implementation plan with the LLM multiple times before I allow it to even start doing anything while my coworkers just write "fix this" and wonder why the stupid AI can't read their minds.
I am producing AI slop as well, just hopefully a bit less. Obviously hand crafted code is still much better but my boss wants me to use "AI" so I do as I am told.