I had fun playing around in Claude getting it to write 6502 assembler for the BBC Micro. It is fun to imagine what we could have built on those old machines with these new coding agents! But it is kind of hollow isn't it.
It is fun to imagine what we could have built on those old machines with these new coding agents! But it is kind of hollow isn't it.
It's the difference between building a table yourself and telling someone else to build a table for you.
If you've never done anything for yourself, usually with your own hands, you don't understand the pleasure and satisfaction that comes from doing it.
And since "AI" isn't human, it can't know that feeling, either.
> If you've never done anything for yourself, usually with your own hands, you don't understand the pleasure and satisfaction that comes from doing it.
That’s an absurd thing to say.
Doesn’t matter what “AI” feels or doesn’t feel. AI is a tool. You can derive as much pleasure from having an ideia, planning it, working on it from a higher level, and seeing it come to life as you do when you get down and dirty with it and do it from the low level up.
You are arguing against a very well known phenomenon. Technical people often avoid getting promoted to management precisely because they love doing the thing themselves. Despite the higher potential for impact in a management position, losing the detailed view of a practitioner is a real loss. This phenomenon is less obvious in big tech because there are so many people who really wanted to be managers the whole time, but had to be engineers first or never really cared about the work, but want a promotion for the better pay.
You either replied to the wrong comment or didn’t and proved my point exactly: some people like the technical low level approach, others prefer the higher level architectural work.
There’s space for both and there’s a need for both.
It's not absurd if you've actually done these things. I can only conclude from your response that you have not, so you don't know what it's like, therefore you don't know what the rest of us talking about.
Well, given that you are selfishly and arrogantly trying to set universal boundaries on what constitutes labour and effort, and what qualifies as “work” based on your feelings alone, then it seems fairly on brand for you to go about assuming things about people you don’t know from atom.
So you do you.
Go have fun bringing other people’s work down so you can feel better about yourself.
pmg101 · · focus · HN ↗
reaperducer · · focus · HN ↗
It's the difference between building a table yourself and telling someone else to build a table for you.
If you've never done anything for yourself, usually with your own hands, you don't understand the pleasure and satisfaction that comes from doing it.
And since "AI" isn't human, it can't know that feeling, either.
kejdjejxjejdj · · focus · HN ↗
That’s an absurd thing to say.
Doesn’t matter what “AI” feels or doesn’t feel. AI is a tool. You can derive as much pleasure from having an ideia, planning it, working on it from a higher level, and seeing it come to life as you do when you get down and dirty with it and do it from the low level up.
Let’s talk like adults here. Please.
MobiusHorizons · · focus · HN ↗
kejdjejxjejdj · · focus · HN ↗
There’s space for both and there’s a need for both.
reaperducer · · focus · HN ↗
It's not absurd if you've actually done these things. I can only conclude from your response that you have not, so you don't know what it's like, therefore you don't know what the rest of us talking about.
kejdjejxjejdj · · focus · HN ↗
Well, given that you are selfishly and arrogantly trying to set universal boundaries on what constitutes labour and effort, and what qualifies as “work” based on your feelings alone, then it seems fairly on brand for you to go about assuming things about people you don’t know from atom.
So you do you.
Go have fun bringing other people’s work down so you can feel better about yourself.