Comment by vouaobrasil

> From what I've seen, I don't think so if we're talking about like-for-like quality. Maybe as an absolute best case scenario, but more typically it's more like you can build in an hour with AI whereas without AI it might take you 2 or 3.

The real problem is that the current paradigm in software design is to aim for the bottom of the barrel or a minimum working thing that can make some money and then move onto the next thing. I think in a way AI is a direct outgrowth of that mentality, because so little emphasis is placed on the final 5% of polish that brings software to the level of amazing.

It's much more evident in photography, which is what I started doing after I quit software. You can see that people are editing photos faster and better with AI, at least at first glance. But the end result is almost always sloppy compared to someone who takes time to think about their edit. I think that basically characterizes AI: yes, it makes things faster (or so I'm told, I've never used an LLM), but it also SHIFTS the emphasis onto rapid prototyping of superficial things.

Can those things be polished? Maybe. But it doesn't change the fact that less and less polishing will be done and people will focus more on creating new, superificial things in the long-term and we'll lose a lot of potentially great, hand-crafted things. Not to mention that AI adoption will likely accelerate even more levels of frameworks, which in turn means more hardware upgrades.