I'm the author of Python Crash Course, and I got this exact same email this week. I was thinking of writing a public response as well, because any attempt to sincerely answer these questions takes something along the lines of a full post. It's also worth a public response because many people who are getting into programming for the first time right now are asking variations of these same questions.
> Do I think that AI enables people to develop faster than they can keep up?
Absolutely. That's the core of this person's email, and everyone else who asks similar questions. Just five years ago, the only way to build a working project of moderate complexity was to learn the basic to intermediate concepts required to make an MVP. Now, if you can steer an LLM reasonably well, you can quickly build an MVP that goes well beyond your own understanding of the implementation.
I don't think anyone has clear answers to all the questions brought up in this email. I think people can learn faster than they used to, because they can make connections between different areas faster than they used to. But it requires skill and discipline in how you learn, and how you work. You have to intentionally build your understanding as you build your projects.
> Now, if you can steer an LLM reasonably well, you can quickly build an MVP that goes well beyond your own understanding of the implementation.
Pre-LLM, I'd distinguish between e.g. "I know Python" and "I know this codebase". So if I wrote a codebase in Python I'd be familiar with it, if someone else wrote a codebase in Python I'd be familiar with the Python. -- An LLM coding agent can give a codebase in Python very quickly.
With a newbie, they'd be familiar with neither; but an LLM coding agent can give them a full solution written in Python.
I'd say that this power from LLM coding agents blurs the distinction, in some sense. But to an extent it's always been the case that abstractions allow programming without a full understanding of everything down to atoms.
People 'can' learn faster than they used to. But I'd think those who are curious to learn will be able to have better results than those who only have a shallow understanding.
japhyr · · focus · HN ↗
> Do I think that AI enables people to develop faster than they can keep up?
Absolutely. That's the core of this person's email, and everyone else who asks similar questions. Just five years ago, the only way to build a working project of moderate complexity was to learn the basic to intermediate concepts required to make an MVP. Now, if you can steer an LLM reasonably well, you can quickly build an MVP that goes well beyond your own understanding of the implementation.
I don't think anyone has clear answers to all the questions brought up in this email. I think people can learn faster than they used to, because they can make connections between different areas faster than they used to. But it requires skill and discipline in how you learn, and how you work. You have to intentionally build your understanding as you build your projects.
rgoulter · · focus · HN ↗
Pre-LLM, I'd distinguish between e.g. "I know Python" and "I know this codebase". So if I wrote a codebase in Python I'd be familiar with it, if someone else wrote a codebase in Python I'd be familiar with the Python. -- An LLM coding agent can give a codebase in Python very quickly.
With a newbie, they'd be familiar with neither; but an LLM coding agent can give them a full solution written in Python.
I'd say that this power from LLM coding agents blurs the distinction, in some sense. But to an extent it's always been the case that abstractions allow programming without a full understanding of everything down to atoms.
People 'can' learn faster than they used to. But I'd think those who are curious to learn will be able to have better results than those who only have a shallow understanding.