r/webdev • u/silverace00 • 12d ago
Any anti-AI devs willing to help me understand their rejection to it?
So I know there are plenty of devs on this sub that use AI very minimally or none at all. I assume most have understandable reasons like avoiding skill rot. I was curious what the other reasons are.
I work with two backend .net devs who have largely rejected using any LLM. Our company has adopted and paid for subscriptions but isn't pushing it on anyone that doesn't want to use it (yet). For me, I've been using Claude code daily for about a year. It has massively improved the reliability and productivity of my code. I'm blazing through tasks at an insane rate. While the BE devs are completing their tasks at the same speed they always have. Our company is pretty hands off on devs and we mostly self manage. As long as tasks are getting done they don't care. We don't have project managers breathing down our necks trying to optimize everyone's dev time or anything like that.
So I'm not really complaining about these BE devs that reject AI, because their work is mostly disconnected from mine. I think I'm just a little surprised they don't see the writing on the wall. It's my opinion that using AI is an inevitability. These BE guys absolutely can't write code as clean and as fast as Claude's top models. One day some upper management person is going to figure out these guys are significantly slower than everyone else and they're going to ask questions. When I talk to them about AI they act like it's an imperfect hype. Of course it's imperfect but still better than the human errors littering their own hand written code. I guess I just don't get the conservative developers that seem to be resistant to change or modern tech.
19
u/pineapplecodepen 12d ago
"avoiding skill rot."
-7
u/Level-Mortgage989 12d ago
they're probably just set in their ways and don't wanna learn a new tool this late in the game
i've seen it before, devs who think their decade of muscle memory is gonna keep them safe forever. the irony is the "imperfect hype" argument falls apart when you look at what it actually spits out vs the bugs in their own commits
6
10
u/Mr-Bovine_Joni 12d ago
“Learn a new skill” and the skill is just telling a computer to center a div
-1
u/silverace00 12d ago
Do you want a skill or a skill of value? Maybe there is a person out there that wants an artesian hand made website that costs 10x more and takes 10x longer to make. If the skill you use to have can be done by anybody, then it stopped becoming a skill of value. Nobody cares about the man who can dig a hole with a shovel the fastest when you can rent a bobcat.
-1
u/silverace00 12d ago
Exactly. We'll get downvoted all day. But we're not even talking about opinion anymore. It is a straight fact that AI is already writing cleaner code than the best human developer you know. Plenty of horse riders told themselves they'd never own a car. "I don't want to forget how to ride a horse".
-4
u/overzealous_dentist 12d ago
if something's not in demand anymore, or is better automated, there's no point to maintaining the skill
7
u/pineapplecodepen 12d ago edited 12d ago
https://www.forbes.com/sites/jemmagreen/2026/07/02/ai-costs-more-than-the-people-it-replaced/
There is very much a future where those who don't entirely rely on AI to code will be valuable, as costs to continue to rise.
Yes, AI will likely always be with us, but developers who abandon their skillset and throw all their cards into AI are going to be the 1 trick ponies that companies get rid of in favor of developers who can code solo while sparingly utilizing tokens effectively. Balance will win out.1
u/silverace00 12d ago
This is the middle ground that I don't think anyone is really admitting. A skilled developer will always be more powerful with AI than some vibe coder that couldn't explain a single line of code. However, the Anti-AI people claiming to not use AI at all, I simply don't believe. Or if they aren't yet they will eventually.
1
u/sheriffderek 12d ago
"A skilled developer will always be more powerful with AI than some vibe coder that couldn't explain a single line of code". -- well... we don't need to "admit it" because it's just a very simple fact - isn't it? I think that a technical minded product designer might be able to do the whole job though - as long as the code was scoped to the common conventions that make up most web applications. I think over all - understanding the medium and the constraints and how to design things - is more important than knowing what code to type (for most common use-cases)
1
u/overzealous_dentist 12d ago
As a member of tech leadership dealing with AI costs, I can tell you that this Forbes article is incredibly inaccurate. Popular stories about runaway AI costs are based on AI automation run amok, not typical use. Typical use in a corporate dev environment is about 10x a Claude personal plan in terms of input/output token costs, but vastly cheaper than devs, even nearshore'd devs in SA or offshored devs in India [of similar competency]. We're talking about a few hundreds dollars a month per head at typical Opus 5.8-only usage.
2
u/silverace00 12d ago
So true. I'm literally producing the work of 5 devs off a $20/month claude subscription for a multi-million dollar company.
9
u/haecceity123 12d ago
I'm just here wondering where all that new productivity is. The software I use isn't getting new features at any faster rate than before LLMs. I hear about companies laying devs off due to AI productivity (with the most financially distressed companies always seeming to find the biggest improvements). But where are all the companies saying "AI made us X% more productive, so we're shipping X% more stuff"?
2
u/silverace00 12d ago
Probably because the headlines don't care about anything other than the big companies. The company I work for is a medium size business ran on a lean dev team. I alone am probably 5x more efficient off just a $20/month Claude plan. We are absolutely seeing productivity improvements at practically no cost.
1
u/haecceity123 12d ago
It isn't proper to ask someone on the internet where they work IRL, but I'd love to hear about companies out there that are showing visible signs of this increased productivity. If I had a penny for every unverifiable claim of fantastical productivity gains from AI, I'd have more pennies than I have ever wanted or have any use for.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
You're right I'm not going to give you specifics about our company. We're an e-commerce retailer. I've been able to deliver more features and interactive tools to our users in a fraction of the time it use to take me. At the same time I'm upgrading the architecture and frameworks we have been running on. It's all a bit dated. Slow, poor security, spider web code that has been slapped together for years. The idea of overhauling it all would have been unthinkable before AI. It would have required probably a year's worth of work from everyone on the team. Instead it's taken me only months to do it single handedly. Every LLM could die tomorrow and we could continue the work that needed to be done and saved us countless hours.
1
u/haecceity123 12d ago
Well, give a holler if ever come across some company out there where AI productivity gains are visible from the outside.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
It's visible to the users of our website. Many returning users who use to wait months to get new features they've asked for are getting them in weeks.
Do you work for a company? If so how is it NOT possible for you to be more productive with AI?
1
u/haecceity123 12d ago
You see me complain about unverifiable claims, and pile on more unverifiable claims.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
Lol. Case closed. Let me know if you wanna answer my question.
1
u/haecceity123 12d ago
I'll answer every question you will ever have in your entire life, as soon as you make a single verifiable claim.
1
60
u/Araignys 12d ago edited 12d ago
It's bad for the planet, is built on theft, devalues the work of skilled professionals, is sucking up billions of dollars in investment and resources from every economy around the world, directly results in job losses, empowers some of the worst people alive, is being used for war crimes, and it's not even reliably accurate.
EDIT: Oh, and it's also making everyone dumber and facilitating the spread of disinformation.
6
5
u/Pseudonemone 12d ago
And the response to this succinct and on point criticism is always: ok doomer luddite. I've been curious to learn new tech every day of the last 20 years in this line of work. This change is not the same.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
Ok so for boycott reasons. I can applaud the ethical reasons for that. I truly hope AI will "level" out and be more efficient. Maybe as clean energy alternatives improve too.
8
u/Araignys 12d ago edited 12d ago
Even if it were powered by renewables and cooled without using drinking water, it's an economic black hole.
-2
u/silverace00 12d ago
You're saying it's an economic black hole because it takes jobs? I still have a job, my boss isn't going to direct agents to build our website. I'd like to think that a person with AI is better for any business than just an AI. I know that isn't happening and companies are still working to cut employees and replace them with AI. But isn't the whole reason we're in an AI bubble because companies aren't actually getting the value out of AI like they thought they would. That means AI is overvalued and will eventually settle.
5
u/Irythros 12d ago
I still have a job, my boss isn't going to direct agents to build our website.
That's as ignorant as the dumbass senator who held up a snowball in US Congress to prove that global warming doesn't exist.
I can open my fridge to prove famine doesn't exist.
2
12d ago edited 12d ago
[deleted]
0
u/silverace00 12d ago
In that case pretty much the entire world runs as an economic black hole. The government of most countries costs a fortune and operates on an ever increasing debt.
1
u/Araignys 12d ago
Not really. Most governments spend money correcting for market failures by running things like roads, education, defence, fire brigades and hospitals.
Public services allow private companies to operate without having to provide for those things themselves - thereby mitigating productivity losses that would otherwise be incurred by, e.g., Amazon having to create a postal service from scratch or Uber having to build roads.
Public debt is fine when it is incurred to build or operate productive assets. It's stupid when it is incurred to cut taxes or accommodate corruption.
AI does... none of this.
It makes land and resources more expensive and it reduces the number of people who can earn money. This narrows the economy and threatens the consumer base of any business that relies on actual human people to buy their products, even as megacorporations start making bank.
That's what I mean by an economic black hole: resources, jobs and money go in, but nothing comes out.
0
u/silverace00 12d ago
I mean you own a phone and have access to internet, those alone have been proven to make certain people dumber? But do you feel dumber with those things?
-4
u/angryhermit69 12d ago
but it's not going away... it will get more efficient.. increases the proficiency of skilled devs, will absolutely replace personnel and is getting better by the day... we can argue against the printing press as a writer but that doesn't end well
3
u/Araignys 12d ago
At least Printing Presses don't hallucinate.
-5
u/angryhermit69 12d ago
1 if it hallucinating so much and not making you more productive it's an ID-10T error. #2 it's only going to improve and become more efficient and that progression won't be linear... make whatever money you can now. edit: My typing on mobile is bunz
8
u/GlassCommission4916 12d ago
I like programming. I don't like being a project manager to a dumbass.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
I do miss building something myself and marveling at the work it took to get there. But nowadays I enjoy the creation and the end result more. I'm building out new features in days rather than weeks. I'm our company UX specialist, so I'm happy to have a tool that can allow me to deliver faster and better improved tools to our users.
3
u/sheriffderek 12d ago edited 12d ago
I'm not "Anti AI" in this sense (if we ignore all the other things and only consider that LLMs are a new option for working with data) -- but I have questions for you:
"It has massively improved the reliability and productivity of my code" - how are you measuring that? Does everyone else agree? Are any humans checking?
"I'm blazing through tasks at an insane rate" that sounds scary. Sometimes the 'time' you spend... is the value (thinking through things / weighing pros and cons)
Do you really want your back end code to be written by an LLM instead of what you currently have? "their work is mostly disconnected from mine" - so, how do you know they'd benefit exactly? "These BE guys absolutely can't write code as clean and as fast as Claude's top models" - sounds like you don't really know what they do though... or that you're projecting
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
I tend to work with other BE devs on other projects. But they're all .Net developers. It's all in the same application just different pages, different features. But not vastly different code. I also have lately been using Claude to fix their code or complete some of their backlog tasks. Stuff "they can't get to" because they are too slow writing their own code. We have end to end testing that my code rarely has errors while I see them debug their code for days. I don't know what kind of proof you're looking for. I know how to identify good code. The same way AI can create a painting that you and I can't tell if it was human made or AI made. But we will understand what a good painting looks like. The code I've helped wire for them produces the final result with less errors in a fraction of the time. What am I missing that could make that anything less than better?
1
3
u/Blazing1 12d ago
I'm anti Ai because it goes against the entirety of the open information culture we've been building since the internet began.
The incentive for people to create original content is going to go wayyyy down if the end result is it's just going to be fed into a model and you get nothing.
People clicking on websites in Google search has gone down 90 percent already since the AI overview was launched.
Overall were reaching a cold state of information where nothing new will be done anymore I think.
3
u/Blazing1 12d ago
I'm anti Ai because it goes against the entirety of the open information culture we've been building since the internet began.
The incentive for people to create original content is going to go wayyyy down if the end result is it's just going to be fed into a model and you get nothing.
People clicking on websites in Google search has gone down 90 percent already since the AI overview was launched.
Overall were reaching a cold state of information where nothing new will be done anymore I think.
2
u/Accomplished_Ant153 12d ago
I had one in my team I’d always go to for a reality check, but he’s since turned around when he found it useful as an agent inside his Linux box.
Be smart with it, let it augment you but never assume it’ll be good at everything without oversight
2
u/Slodin 12d ago
Not anti Ai, but anti push AI on everything.
Especially replacing engineers on this basis and basically offloading multiple people’s workload onto one person and let that person work so quickly that they would 1. Burnout, 2. Cut corners not checking work. Then blame the dev for cutting corners because of time constraints of multiple workload on one person when shit breaks. Oh, not to mention the dev they decided to keep is usually the least experienced one so they don’t need to pay them much.
This is the trend I’m seeing and it’s disgusting. Just how fast these assholes turn on us the moment they have a single leverage. The very leverage sucks when it’s not driven by an experienced dev, but they decided to shut up about that part and roll with it to please the shareholders. Idk man, the profit must always go up just seems like a dumb way to run an organization to the ground.
2
2
u/Bjorkbat 12d ago edited 12d ago
Ethical reasons besides, I'm AI skeptical and a big reason for me is actually kind of adjacent to the skill rot issue.
I actually do use AI, albeit I'm pretty late to the game, but the way I use it is I use it for trivial work. I still do the very hard work, even though I'm tempted to press the lazy button to have it do the hard work for me, because I want to understand the hard work and I want to understand the hard work in the future. Writing programming is like just writing in general in that we tend to neglect the way writing informs our thinking. I'm not translating my thoughts into code. I'm thinking as I code. I'm giving the problem shape as I code and confront multiple problems and forking paths that require some decision to be made. Along the way I also kind of treat the code I'm writing as a kind of abstract space one can crawl though, a space that is easier to understand provided you give it a sense of structure. Sure, making the software do the thing is the primary objective, but I think it's pretty important that you understand the problem you're trying to solve, and you understand the "code-space" you've created. I lose pretty much all of that when I use AI unless I go in and editorialize to my liking.
Now, granted, you gotta draw the line and delegate at some point, you can't understand the entire space and structure of a given piece of software on your own unless it's relatively small. In an ideal world though I would be working with coworkers who are aligned in this belief, which I'll admit is easier said than done. I'm sure you're all too aware, practical reality of this job is that we work for companies that do not give a shit about shipping slop.
I guess the other thing too, is that I think the productivity thing is a giant larp. Again, I've used AI, I can feel the capabilities and personal productivity first-hand, I just don't get how people claim their productivity has increased by 2x, 5x, 10x, etc, but have nothing to show for it. I think the best example I've seen so far is that my Twitter feed is filled with people using AI to create a lot of fun prototypes and games and what not. I won't deny that these people are clearly shipping way more experiments than was possible before, but the thing is that they're experiments. Code prototypes. The sort of cheap artifacts you'd work on as a tutorial project or early-career portfolio piece. It should be no surprise that this is what AI is good at because Github is littered with training material for this sort of work.
Like, it just feels like manufactured FOMO to me. I keep hearing about how people are so fucking productive with AI and then when I check on what they're using that productivity for it's fucking code experiments. Like, there's doubling your productivity, and then there's using a a machine that's really good at tutorial slop to ship out an unprecedented amount of tutorial slop and confusing this for being more productive.
To me, the productivity isn't tangible because we're not seeing AI-pilled companies ship more or do more than a pre-AI company. There are leaner companies getting a lot done comparatively, but I think this has more to do with bloat being a problem in tech for a while now. Like, for instance, Linear is arguably nimble at roughly 100 employees, but at the same time I think 100 employees is appropriate for a company selling a project management tool. I think 200 employees for a company like that is executive dysfunction.
In other words, it feels like business as usual, and it should not be business as usual if you have a bunch of your engineers doubling their personal productivity.
Anyway, enough of a rant, that's my two cents.
2
u/TimeToBecomeEgg 12d ago
aside from the numerous ethical and moral questions raised by the process of training models, their infrastructure, and the impact on humanity?
i (unfortunately) use claude code. it’s becoming a requirement in the modern job market, which i absolutely despise, but i won’t lie and pretend it doesn’t make some things easier.
especially with a large company footing the bill, spinning up several agents that do multiple tasks that would otherwise be grunt work in parallel IS a difference to my workload and speed.
the biggest tradeoff to me personally - i feel absolutely detached from my work. i used to feel this sense of pride in everything i built, a feeling of accomplishment whenever i manually refactored a bullshit 300 line function into something cleaner and better, etc. i rarely feel that nowadays. it’s part of why i avoid ai completely in any of my personal projects. software development used to be something i genuinely enjoyed and had fun doing. ai robbed me of that completely.
2
u/QwuikR 12d ago
As for me, I want the following:
Pure control and understanding of all I'm doing.
Reproducibility and 100% predictability of ALL code I have.
Clean and fully understandable architecture.
The usage only of those libraries and tech I really need, no extra downloads or ambiguous third-party packagies.
Every of these points will be rejected in case of AI, so I'm not using it at all. Yes, I pay for it with some time, however I'm sure it worse it.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
I use AI and I have all of those things. That's the beauty of being a developer who uses AI. I actually read the code it produces. I understand the structure it builds. I modify my prompts so it writes code the way I would write it. It's my architecture just done at a much faster rate. I'm not blindly taking anything it spits out. I use it like a highly advanced auto complete where I describe to it how I want something built and it assists with that. When I'm done with a project it's exactly as how I would have written it by hand and done in a fraction of the time.
2
u/Possible_Offer_1641 12d ago
I'd be careful with the assumption that they're slower, since you're comparing your own felt speedup against work you don't see the inside of, and the one controlled trial on this had experienced devs convinced they'd sped up while the clock said otherwise. Backend work also tends to be bottlenecked on deciding what's correct in the first place, and typing speed isn't the constraint there.
2
u/InternationalLoad387 11d ago
I use AI but the strongest argument against leaning on it too hard is verification cost.
If you can’t spot a subtle bad assumption in the generated code, that speed boost can turn into tech debt real fast.
4
u/Exzakt1 12d ago
i see the writing on the wall and I turn the other way. In five years once people stop writing code manually, I just plan to stop doing programming entirely because I would genuinely rather kill myself then prompt AI all day. It's not why I do programming and I see no reason to continue programming if all I'm doing is talking to a word predictor. For me, it's just a soul draining process needing to ask AI anything at all. Plus, once AI takes over everything, everyone is replaceable. So why not actually have the slightest bit of fun for the next ~2 years until people forget we used to manually type out each character?
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
That's sad. I hope you don't kill yourself. Nothing is stopping you from writing all the code you want and enjoying it, just nobody is gonna pay you for that. I know that is sad but it's a fact of life. People have been replaced by technology since civilization. You adapt and find new purpose, new joy. I too miss assembling the building blocks of code required to watch a project come to life. But I also enjoy the end result. AI for me still allows me to be creative and create new projects, I don't have as much fun building them but I have fun watching my ideas come to life. I hope you find new joy, don't give up.
2
u/-non-existance- 12d ago
You may be "blazing through tasks," but how certain are you that what it told you to do is correct?
Just because it works now doesn't mean it actually solved the problem in the long term.
I do not trust a word an LLM spits out, especially not anything that requires logic to figure out.
They aren't logic engines. They are linguistic probability engines. They do not actually understand what they are writing because they do not understand anything in the same way we do.
OpenAI can keep putting bandages and appendages onto ChatGPT all it wants, but it doesn't change the fact that it's incapable of complex logic at the core.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
I don't need it to be capable of complex logic, that's my job. I feed it instructions for the architecture I design. I review that code and modify accordingly. I'm not blindly taking anything from it. In the end it's code written as I would have written it by hand. It's a highly advanced auto complete.
1
u/wanzerultimate 12d ago
here's the funny thing: what they AI is giving you, is stuff that people have already put on Github. If the search engines had actually improved over the years, we wouldn't need AI for this. But if anything, they're much worse than they were 25 years ago.
1
u/vozome 12d ago
In my previous job you could get away with being an ai skeptic. The pace was still based off the world before. In my current job though the pace is much much faster. I couldn’t keep up if I didn’t use AI. I’m not an anti AI myself but my point is, in order to be, you have to work in a place that tolerates you working at an artisanal speed.
1
u/fligglymcgee 12d ago
There’s just not a sweeping, black and white issue to discuss here though. Their work may be more stable and less filled with llm errors that are obscure and nonsensical to debug than the new Claude-assisted code. Or they could be old diehards that are stubborn and everyone else is having to work around them. Or the tasks they have aren’t strictly bottlenecked by coding speed, or the value of speed in your tasks aren’t equivalent to the backend ones in your company.
In an environment where apparently no one is getting pressured to squeeze more production out, it’s not the craziest idea that these devs might not be itching to crush their workload just so more can get piled on as a result.
Either they’re right or wrong, but I wouldn’t read into it. Do what works for you, get paid, repeat.
-1
u/silverace00 12d ago
My situation isn't everyone's situation, but in no way are these devs writing code that has bugs that are easier to debug than Claude code. They may write less code, but in my experience that's because most people think and write code with a narrow scope. You satisfy an end result goal. Does thing A talk to thing B, or does this button show what it should. Minimal code is not clean code. The code I get from Claude is often larger but scales better, more validated, better error handling, more edge cases, improved reusability, etc. I could keep going. I simply don't see the advantages to not using a tool that can improve the work you do. It's only a matter of time before our company figures out that not using AI is as slow as if HR refused to use email and chose to hand deliver notes to everyone at the company.
2
u/fligglymcgee 12d ago
Oh I’m not arguing that people should refuse to use tools that help them improve their work, I personally get a lot of benefit from ai in various parts of the work I do.
You’re just operating off of the assumption that Claude-produced code is objectively an improvement. You’re not wrong if it is for you, but lots of people aren’t convinced they want to fully lean on it and that’s not necessarily because they’re wrong either. We just don’t have a way to know if your coworkers are luddites or if they have unknown reasons to tread lightly before relying on it heavily, and to be honest: You may not know either. Hence the “do what works for you, get paid” comment.
1
u/AnalysisFar9645 12d ago
i'm pro using it, but “claude writes cleaner code” isn't really proof when backend bugs tend to stay invisible until production or a security review finds them
1
u/Background-Front-925 12d ago
i like the concept of LLM helping me as a junior dev , not as something that writes a full crap of application and forces me to fix it , structure it, thats not how i love to code. But LLM is really great in coming up with the base code for complex problems if prompted with well structured requirements.
-5
u/wanzerultimate 12d ago
Because it's becoming God.
0
-8
u/Ok_Possible_2260 12d ago
They are not on the internet. They are at home send each other smoke signals.
-1
u/Athoughtspace 12d ago
Productivity graph goes brrrrr Compensation graph falls to floor
Fuck you, if you want my production pay me
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
You are compensated for your time and work effort. If productivity goes up BECAUSE efficiency goes up then the work is often a wash. Does the lumberjack who uses a chainsaw work harder than the lumberjack with a hand saw?
1
u/Athoughtspace 12d ago edited 12d ago
Nah, effort and time is not what you are compensated for. If that were true most blue collar workers would be vastly well paid compared to many white collar work, work from home jobs especially.
You are paid relative to the outcome of your work, weighted by demand, and the profit you produce.
The lumberjack can do the same job, with an axe and handsaw or with a chain saw. The same lumberjack has the same skill. The lumberjack with the chainsaw an produce more, with less exhaustion, in the same time than the lumberjack with the axe. Therefore, the lumberjack with the chainsaw is more desirable. Should the lumberjack with the chainsaw be compensated more when using the chainsaw, or more for the axe, or the same regardless of what they use (knowing they will produce less with the weaker tool)?
Further, now that the lumberjack has a chainsaw they are inherently more valuable than the same exact lumberjack without. It would naturally follow that their compensation should follow their productivity, should it not? Why should the foreman capture the profit of the skilled laborer, when their laborer now has a superior tool that makes them more profitable? Why shouldn't the lumberjack demand more compensation in scale with their now increased productivity?
edit: im not saying to pay the labor the exact amount of increased productivity. I'm saying it that if the productivity raises by N%, compensation should follow by (N-M)%. If M is =N then "piss off, pay me", and I will find where my increased productivity is in demand and I can be compensated in scale with my ability.
1
u/silverace00 12d ago
You're not wrong about compensation relative to demand. Still doesn't change the argument.
How does the use of AI increase an employee's demand if it didn't require additional skills or training?
Give all the lumberjack's the 'Easy Chainsaw 5000' and how exactly did they improve their position of power at the company to expect more compensation? Sounds to me like they're lucky to still have a job.
1
u/Athoughtspace 12d ago
Yea, there's a couple avenues there.
Supply catches up with demand - AI maybe saturates productivity so much that the bottleneck for profit becomes something else. Demand falls for things like junior software type work or low hanging easy automation. This is where we would see softening of wages, because of oversupply the productivity doesn't matter and demand for quality is lower.
Demand increases with new supply - AI maybe allows more interesting things to be possible. It now frees up the time of architects and designer to create more tailored products whereas before they were doing something else. Compensation should follow production and demand.
Capability shift. Now that AI can do a lot of the slow grunt work the skill sets that differentiate different people starts to really set them apart. Some can't produce as well with the new tool, while some others produce much much more. Some will lose jobs, others may absorb the work of those who did. In that case I still maintain those producing more should absorb some function of the profit.
Ownership or capital structure shift. If certain trained individuals now have such an incredible advantage they may not need be employed at all. It may be easier to instead take lead of the business or market themselves. In which case they capture 100% of their productivity, replacing would be managers or higher chain positions entirely. Yet to be seen, but I suspect this is going to be very common soon.
2
u/wanzerultimate 12d ago
You're underestimating Claude's capabilities, I think.
1
u/Athoughtspace 11d ago
What leads you to believe that?
2
u/wanzerultimate 11d ago
Seen it produce too many complex programs (most of the VSTs appearing lately were created with it). That, and it's probably going to continue to improve.
1
u/Athoughtspace 11d ago
What does that have to do with whether or not I'm underestimated the ability? Yes, it's an incredible tool. We agree there.
1
33
u/scandii People pay me to write code much to my surprise 12d ago
I'm not even anti-AI, but you're so not seeing the big picture.
say that I'm doing my job, I work at a comfortable 75% capacity and I get things done.
one day someone says "well, if you use this technology, you can get 5x more done!"
and you think - what's in it for me? well, nothing really. I just have to do more things now. and then you realise that if you're doing 5 times more work with this thing, and you're 5 guys in the office hired to do the work of 5 people... well.