The babysitting point is the one people keep glossing over. AI doesn't remove cognitive load from your day, it relocates it. Instead of thinking hard about writing the code, you're thinking hard about reviewing the code — which is actually harder for most people because it requires holding the correct solution in your head to compare against what was generated.

Karpathy's 0% own code / infinite possibility feeling makes sense for someone who can evaluate correctness at a glance across most domains. For that person, AI is a genuine multiplier. For someone earlier in their career, or working outside their strongest domain, the review overhead often consumes the writing savings entirely.

The 4-hour sleep thing is the tell. That's not productivity, that's stimulation. The slot machine feeling of "what will the AI build next" is real, and it's orthogonal to whether the output is actually useful.

Yea there could also be an issue with learning how to hand hold an AI vs working on how to actually engineer good solutions. Maybe one feeds into the other since we're not getting off the AI train...

If my brain got a 100x overclock (both on speed and endurance), I'd be excited to use it all the time too.

The issue is obviously AI isn't that, it's a simulation of that that often fails...

> When it breaks or has bugs, who has to deal with me? Me. What about the infrastructure? Another thing to do.

Wait, why are you doing it? If you're already that far, have the AI agent do that for you as well.