I believe this type of person exists.
replyMy team lead has worked on the same software for 30 years. He has the ability to hear me discuss a bug I noticed, and then pinpoint not only the likely culprit, but the exact function that's causing it.
I do the same thing in a project I’ve worked on for 25 years. I’ve had mediocre at best results with AI. It’s useful to discuss concepts with, but the code never handles the nuances of the edge cases.
replyThen they quit or die.
replyWhat is your argument? Should we stop training people on how to do something because we're mortals?
replyYep this is like comparing master craftsmanship with a production line. You're gonna get good attention to detail and a masterpiece from one, and a limited thing that will break after few years from the other. But for majority of use cases the second one is enough. And pointing out the master craftsmanship is "better" is besides the point.
replyAnd with one you need to train a guy for 25 years and with the other you need plan mode for a few minutes and then it runs 24/7.
Our society needs more experts, not less.
replyDo we? We have many buildings built and very little master masons or whatever nowadays. The amount of craftsmen needed to build a 10 story building is very limited. That's what we should aim for software, much less experts needed for the same outcome so more people can benefit from software.
reply