Comment by globnomulous

> One could say this about absolutely any technology.

What do I become worse at when I learn metallurgy, woodworking, optics, painting, or cooking?

> But as with everything else, you can take technology to do more, things that might be impossible for you to do without it, and that's ok.

Whether LLMs are helpful or enable anybody to do 'more' is beside the point.

I don't care about doing more -- or the 'more' I care about is only tangentially related to my actual output as an engineer. I care about developing my skill as an SWE and deepening my understanding. LLMs stand in the way of that. They poison it. Anybody who loves and values the skill as I do does themselves a disservice by letting an LLM do the work, particularly the thinking and problem solving. And even if you don't care about the skill, and are delighted to find that LLMs increase your output while you're using them, I'd wager you'll pay a hefty long-term intellectual and personal cost, in that you'll become a worse, lazier, less engaged engineer.

That's what this guy's post is about: losing the ability to do the work, or finding yourself bewildered by it, because you're no longer practicing it.

If code is just an obstacle to your goals but also the means of reaching them, and LLMs help you reach your goals, great, more power to you. My goal is to program. I just want to continue to do what I love and, day by day, problem by problem, become better at it. When I can no longer do that as an SWE, and I'm expected (let alone required) to let an obnoxious, chipper chatbot do the work, while I line the pockets of some charlatan 'thought leader,' I'll retire or blow my brains out.