Everyone could always learn woodworking, weaving, sewing, smithing, … that is not an argument. The point is that better tools make it easier to learn/perform/perfect these skills. Today anyone with a little torch and a hammer can play around with steel. 300 years ago you had to at least take on an apprenticeship to ever get to do that. Sewing with a sewing machine is so much faster, there is not much time to invest before you can make your own clothes.
Not everyone has 100s of hours free time to sink into this and that skill “the purist way”. Any tool that makes the learning curve more shallow and/or the process itself easier/cheaper/… helps democratizing these things.
You argue as if everyone needs to be a super duper software architect, while most people just want to create some tool or game or whatever they think of, just for themselves.
Well, if you want to use that stuff for your personal use that’s totally fine. But there is a difference between doing that and selling your creation as a product. To pick up on your example, it’s great if someone learns woodworking and puts together a table or something. You probably won’t sell it though because unless you get really good at it, the piece of furniture will not meet the standards for a good product. It’s absolutely the same when using LLMs to put together a piece of software. It will fall apart quickly unless you put some serious work in it. A lot of people think LLMs are a shortcut to learning this stuff and then go on and pretend to be professional software developers. I also doubt these vibecoders learn a lot about about coding when they don’t even understand what the LLM is putting together for them as a result of a few wishful prompts.
300 years ago you had to at least take on an apprenticeship to ever get to do that. Sewing with a sewing machine is so much faster, there is not much time to invest before you can make your own clothes.
And four years ago a person needed a $100.00 Raspberry Pi 400 and a $25 Python or Java book, or an Internet connection and the URL for https://scratch.mit.edu/.
I am also a fan of how AI is making coding more accessible. But it was hardly out of reach before AI hit the scene.
Many of us in the community pirated our first proprietary code editors and books; and we worked hard for our whole careers to make sure the next generation of developers didn’t have to steal their entry to the profession.
Then AI slurped up and regurgitated our years of hard work, and newbies are thanking AI tech bro assholes for welcoming them to the coding community; instead of thanking the folks who tirelessly wrote and published the materials that the AI is regurgitating.
It’s fine to agree that AI made a difference. But AI only did the final easy part.
No question, but ethics are a different topic where we seem to agree.
In any case, I find it appalling how much people argue against what they think who I am or more generally that they argue about me at all instead of the topic. Simply because I am not “on their side”. You too do this kind of gatekeeping around “we did the hard work” and “those thanking AI are only noobs”, in both cases I am implicitly excluded/meant the way you phrase it. Mind you, both are very much incorrect. I learned to code MCUs 10+ years ago with Arduino and built a potent simulation tool for the chemical industry just prior to the launch of GPT3. I am also absolutely not a professional software engineer. But why do I need to say that? It should be completely irrelevant to the discussion. Instead, people want to show/see authority as if it meant anything.
I don’t mean to argue with you. I’m just trying to answer your implied question - “Why are so many programmers angry at this new tool?”
Like artists, this new tool steals our work without giving due credit. And then it tries to replace us with a low quality mass regurgitation of our past work.
I’m not angry that you have this new tool, I’m still happy if it helps you.
I’m angry at how this tool was created and how it is being sold and monetized by scam artists.
Edit: I guess I am arguing one point: People keep unjustly crediting AI for making an on-ramp for new developers. AI didn’t do shit. People like myself built that on-ramp. I am happy that AI made the on-ramps I have helped build more discoverable. But I wish folks would not lose site of the fact that AI is just regurgitating guides that I, and my peers, wrote.
It is annoying (and a little insulting) to constantly hear about how helpful AIs answers are. I wrote many of those answers. AI copied and pasted them.
Edit: I’m not mad at AI users for having easy access to something I wrote. I wrote it for them.
I’m mad at AI Tech Bro’s for stealing my work and taking credit for it, while charging people for something I gave away for free.
Everyone could always learn woodworking, weaving, sewing, smithing, … that is not an argument. The point is that better tools make it easier to learn/perform/perfect these skills. Today anyone with a little torch and a hammer can play around with steel. 300 years ago you had to at least take on an apprenticeship to ever get to do that. Sewing with a sewing machine is so much faster, there is not much time to invest before you can make your own clothes.
Not everyone has 100s of hours free time to sink into this and that skill “the purist way”. Any tool that makes the learning curve more shallow and/or the process itself easier/cheaper/… helps democratizing these things.
You argue as if everyone needs to be a super duper software architect, while most people just want to create some tool or game or whatever they think of, just for themselves.
Well, if you want to use that stuff for your personal use that’s totally fine. But there is a difference between doing that and selling your creation as a product. To pick up on your example, it’s great if someone learns woodworking and puts together a table or something. You probably won’t sell it though because unless you get really good at it, the piece of furniture will not meet the standards for a good product. It’s absolutely the same when using LLMs to put together a piece of software. It will fall apart quickly unless you put some serious work in it. A lot of people think LLMs are a shortcut to learning this stuff and then go on and pretend to be professional software developers. I also doubt these vibecoders learn a lot about about coding when they don’t even understand what the LLM is putting together for them as a result of a few wishful prompts.
And four years ago a person needed a $100.00 Raspberry Pi 400 and a $25 Python or Java book, or an Internet connection and the URL for https://scratch.mit.edu/.
I am also a fan of how AI is making coding more accessible. But it was hardly out of reach before AI hit the scene.
Many of us in the community pirated our first proprietary code editors and books; and we worked hard for our whole careers to make sure the next generation of developers didn’t have to steal their entry to the profession.
Then AI slurped up and regurgitated our years of hard work, and newbies are thanking AI tech bro assholes for welcoming them to the coding community; instead of thanking the folks who tirelessly wrote and published the materials that the AI is regurgitating.
It’s fine to agree that AI made a difference. But AI only did the final easy part.
No question, but ethics are a different topic where we seem to agree.
In any case, I find it appalling how much people argue against what they think who I am or more generally that they argue about me at all instead of the topic. Simply because I am not “on their side”. You too do this kind of gatekeeping around “we did the hard work” and “those thanking AI are only noobs”, in both cases I am implicitly excluded/meant the way you phrase it. Mind you, both are very much incorrect. I learned to code MCUs 10+ years ago with Arduino and built a potent simulation tool for the chemical industry just prior to the launch of GPT3. I am also absolutely not a professional software engineer. But why do I need to say that? It should be completely irrelevant to the discussion. Instead, people want to show/see authority as if it meant anything.
I don’t mean to argue with you. I’m just trying to answer your implied question - “Why are so many programmers angry at this new tool?”
Like artists, this new tool steals our work without giving due credit. And then it tries to replace us with a low quality mass regurgitation of our past work.
I’m not angry that you have this new tool, I’m still happy if it helps you.
I’m angry at how this tool was created and how it is being sold and monetized by scam artists.
Edit: I guess I am arguing one point: People keep unjustly crediting AI for making an on-ramp for new developers. AI didn’t do shit. People like myself built that on-ramp. I am happy that AI made the on-ramps I have helped build more discoverable. But I wish folks would not lose site of the fact that AI is just regurgitating guides that I, and my peers, wrote.
It is annoying (and a little insulting) to constantly hear about how helpful AIs answers are. I wrote many of those answers. AI copied and pasted them.
Edit: I’m not mad at AI users for having easy access to something I wrote. I wrote it for them.
I’m mad at AI Tech Bro’s for stealing my work and taking credit for it, while charging people for something I gave away for free.
Yes, completely relatable.