The main use I find for LLMs is code review and corrections following a list of criteria. It helps to detect overlooked issues.

It is also useful for learning from independent code snippets, for e.g., learning a new API.

Cost of AI coding tools may decrease in future making it more accessible for everyone. And we will all be forced to move up the value ladder.

We move up, down or sideways on the stack. That's the outcome. Not necessarily bad. It requires soul searching to find out new place.

The idea of "breaking the game" here is similar to that expressed in this other recent post: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43650656 . The focus here is a bit different though.

> It makes economic sense, and capitalism is not sentimental.

I find this kind of fatalism irritating. If capitalism isn't doing what we as humans want it to do, we can change it.

my ai-pilled co worker committed some code using a promise with a lambda that resolved it in a one liner, the parameter was called resolve.

for some reason he also included a import for "resolve from dns".

(the code didn't even need a promise there)

Some people like to whittle wood. It’s no longer a career choice with strong prospects.

As for: ” In some countries, more than 90% of the population lives on less than $5 per day.”

Well, with the orders of magnitude difference already in place, this is not going to meaningfully impact that at all.

Im not dismissing this: I’m saying that it isn’t much of a building block in thinking about all of the things AI is going to change and should be addressed as a result because it’s simply in the pile of problems labeled “was here before, will be here after”.

And really, it ought to be thought of in the context of “can we leverage AI to help address this problem in ways we cannot do so now?”

[dead]

[flagged]