An excavator can also lift rocks that I can't. But that's really beside the point.

It doesn't really matter which analogy you use, the fact is that I can do what an LLM can do, in my field. I can probably do a better job, because I know more current web APIs than an LLM has had time to train on because of limited human output.

You don't get faster results with more developers though. You don't make a baby in one month with 9 mothers either. You might have seen a small increase in development time with more than one dev on a single project but that doesn't scale past more than a handful of devs, usually. At least not per feature.

The difference here is that I know as well as everyone else that I couldn't possibly do what the excavator does with my own two hands, so the skill here becomes operating the vehicle itself. But what the LLM can do, I can do.

This is so often the argument when talking to LLM apologists/proponents, that "this is a shift just like any other before it", but it isn't. It sneakily resembles one, but it is not exactly like one. There are major differences that set it apart from previous shifts. This isn't just a "paradigm shift". We are no longer thinking of solutions on our own, so we are/will be losing the ability to do so, yet we are expected to be the judges as to whether the generated solutions are good or not. That doesn't add up.

Once a few generations of "developers" have grown up with LLMs, it'll eventually be like using a calculator to solve divisions with large numbers, yet still you have to check your work. But if you keep using the calculator, or you never even trained yourself to do the divisions by hand in the first place, you won't be able to check the solution is correct.

The thing is, nobody knows how much effort I put into it versus the AI. There's just no scenario where I could proudly take credit for using AI. Either I put in tons of work but others have no idea how much work is mine vs not, or I don't do much work and I'll know I don't deserve credit.

Like I understand where you're trying to come from here but I just can't see myself winning with AI, against my own morals.

Me collaborating with a human is different. Then the other human and I will know how much work went into it, and at least two real people will share the knowledge of who did what.

total net household wealth

Pardon my ignorance but what does that term mean exactly? What I'm talking about is how much money the average person has among the majority, basically. For which I imagined the median would be a better sample.

I have strong doubts about any metric that ranks the United States as the wealthiest country in today's climate. But I'm okay with being wrong.

Well shit, this house too nice to bomb? Damn these settlers, man. Won't even let the man peacefully leave his beautiful home and say goodbye.

under certain conditions

— Google

[Looks inside, hoping there's a fix for "Done charging" getting stuck after unplugging, showing the same battery level all day.]

Fuck Google for this.

I just think I wouldn't be able to be proud of my work anymore. I wouldn't feel good signing off on generated stuff. It's not my work.

It's like generating a poster for a movie or something. Taking credit for that is just scummy, you know? I know people don't think anyone writes their own code anymore, professionally...

... but I would know. It would bother me.

Uh huh. "They are subhuman now, so we are treating them like subhuman to stop them from being subhuman."

Excellent logic. 😆

IMO current LLMs are ideal for generating the filler for self-help books. You have like 10 pages worth of ideas to say, but the publisher demands a 250-page book.

lol okay. For a second there, with that previous comment you made, you made me think you actually thought LLMs were good for coding.

Which is in whose possession? And the national debt is how big?