The point is that it takes significant time and attention to keep up with the treadmill of constantly learning the new tool/model/framework of the month, so there's significant opportunity cost. I have continued putting 100% of my attention on the direct problems I'm solving.
I don't see the coding as the hard or critical part of my work, so I don't put effort into accelerating or delegating that part.
Not really. It's on the people asserting the positive (that LLMs do improve productivity for sufficiently experienced engineers) to prove it. In the absence of proof, the null hypothesis is the default.
The point is that it takes significant time and attention to keep up with the treadmill of constantly learning the new tool/model/framework of the month, so there's significant opportunity cost. I have continued putting 100% of my attention on the direct problems I'm solving.
I don't see the coding as the hard or critical part of my work, so I don't put effort into accelerating or delegating that part.
Not really. It's on the people asserting the positive (that LLMs do improve productivity for sufficiently experienced engineers) to prove it. In the absence of proof, the null hypothesis is the default.