undefined

points

[-]

I feel like this belittles knitters and sewers!

There's also a tension in your comment. Are we prioritizing "advancing society" or programmer feelings? If it's the former, then it doesn't matter if AI is better than humans, whatever moves us forward faster is better. If it's the latter, then we're talking about holding back progress for the sake of a programmer's feelings.

For the record, I'm a lifelong programmer who loves AI because now I can experiment with new ideas at a scale I could not before. I feel zero loss. In fact using AI brings back the magic of technology that we lost in the 90s with the "business-ifying" of tech.

by rubikscube094 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm just saying that before programmer feelings used to be loosely aligned with advancing society: fun work (for some people) was useful work. Now that's starting to be decoupled and it sucks when your choices are hate your job and contribute or do fun stuff and don't contribute. Granted this is the dilemma most people have faced, but for people who like their work as it is right now it sucks.

by slowin3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

I'm a programmer and I'm having more fun than ever thanks to AI. I do think a lot of programmers are pretty conservative by nature, so maybe that's the group that's struggling more. If I had to wager, I think the camp is split between those who spent a long time in university vs self-taught hacker types (I'm the latter).

by rubikscube093 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Fair enough. I don't mean to speak for all programmers (I'm not one). In fact I'm an academic so that's probably why I'm upset.

by schiem4 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I find this comment fascinating for a few reasons. The first is that it has the underlying assumption that all "progress" is good (regardless of what we're progressing towards). From my perspective, it seems like most of the progress being made is towards bringing about a sort of techno-feudalism and environmental collapse. Maybe a little bit less progress would actually benefit humanity?

The second thing revolves around this:

> In fact using AI brings back the magic of technology that we lost in the 90s with the "business-ifying" of tech.

This is the complete opposite of my experience. AI seems like the logical conclusion of the business-ifying of tech. Get rid of all those pesky nerds, and the MBAs can just create whatever grift pops into their head.

by itishappy1 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

> From my perspective, it seems like most of the progress being made is towards bringing about a sort of techno-feudalism and environmental collapse. Maybe a little bit less progress would actually benefit humanity?

I'd argue you're conflating two independent axis: technological progress and societal inequality.

AI is useful today and is getting more powerful and efficient. This is obviously great for humanity! It's enabling discoveries that were previously out of reach, and allowing us to accomplish the same amount of work with less effort.

AI is also generating massive amounts of money for the wealthy and powerful and increasing inequality. This is not great for humanity!

I do think it's important to keep in mind that this centralization of power and wealth is not caused by AI directly: the pattern exists whenever there's a desirable but scarce resource. The same argument that AI is increasing inequality can reasonably be made about concrete, steel, and steam engines. The problems caused by AI are really human problems at their core. It's possible AI could even help us fix them! (I'm not at all hopeful.)

by agentultra22 minutes ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

> Get rid of all those pesky nerds, and the MBAs can just create whatever grift pops into their head.

They have a hard time dealing with those people that tell them their ideas are bad, unethical, or illegal.

Now they have their Fisher-Price steering wheel hooked into the drive train of the business!

https://doctorow.medium.com/https-pluralistic-net-2025-08-18...

by slowin3 hours ago|

parent|

prev|

[-]

I think progress is inevitable. Sometimes good, sometimes bad (in my perspective). I love AI but I don't like the eco-damage required to power it (not just water/electricity, but rare earth mining and the human rights violations that go with it). I don't think you can go backwards though.

I was just pointing out the logical tension in the comment I was replying to.

> This is the complete opposite of my experience. AI seems like the logical conclusion of the business-ifying of tech. Get rid of all those pesky nerds, and the MBAs can just create whatever grift pops into their head.

I have dozens of extremely nerdy projects going thanks to AI. I wouldn't have had time for any of them because I was too busy making money to spend 100+ extra hours programming my wildest tech fantasies, but now that's possible!

AI also makes it possible to do hardware programming, reverse engineering (when Anthropic isn't censoring itself) and all manner of other geeky pursuits.

by schiem3 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Sure, I agree that progress (towards something) is inevitable. But in the dichotomy presented ("progress" vs. "programmers feelings"), I took progress to mean "the things we're currently making progress on [with regards to AI]." Which I would say are largely a wealth concentration machine, and will probably be a net negative for humanity. To more directly respond to the original question of "progress or programmer feelings", I would ask why we can't just do something else entirely?

I'm genuinely happy that you're having fun with it. I can't get over the feeling that _I'm not building anything._ To me, it seems like hopping on an IRC channel and copy-pasting code from a greybeard instead of writing it myself. I just don't find that satisfying at all.

by wuliwong6 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

Sewing had been a relevant skill for 10s of thousands of years. Programming has been relevant for 10s of years.

by rubikscube096 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

ok and? both are allowed to suck? most people have lived for 10s of years not 10s of thousands of years so it's not like that "ancestral memory" matters anyways.

by rbtprograms4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

interstingly i think what you are talking about is pretty apt, but not the way you are framing it. knitting and sewing were impactful things in their time; clothing has been something humans need for a long time and more skilled craftsmen were able to produce hgiher quality garments. new techniques increased durability, wearability, comfort, etc. machines commoditized that and made it mich faster to produce garments, so turned these into hobbies and the odd artisan fpcused and made new improvements, but not as often as before.

programming will likely be the same. fewer people who care to be craftsmen, more hobbyist, a few artisans who really dig deep and make new patterns (we still dont see AI sampling out of distribution).

>reduction of the job to a hobby takes that away from them.

this is your personal feeling. they never had anything in the first place, just that the market was valuing a certain skill for what it could output. the perspective you are posting is purely a construct.

by rubikscube093 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

Sure it is a construct (it's how I feel at least).

I didn't mean to say sewing and knitting weren't impactful - on the contrary, they are analogous to programming: they were impactful but now they're basically hobbies. Maybe there are more developments left in the clothing making process - not sure.

by dleslie4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

I think you're undervaluing the skill and technology behind clothing, as well as the impact of clothing. But that's probably a reflection of how technology has allowed us to take it for granted.

by rubikscube094 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

for sure but the point is that sewing isn't really necessary anymore. if all the knitters disappeared tomorrow, the majority of society wouldn't feel it . If (say a few years ago) all SWEs disappeared, that would be a problem for a lot of people. The feeling of impactfulness is gone when things are reduced to a hobby.

by dleslie4 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

That may be true today; but the trend is towards that no longer being the case sometime in the not too distant future.

by rubikscube093 hours ago|

parent|

[-]

yes, that's my point.

by luxuryballs1 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

it's like how I can still get a typewriter and use it for the experience, or like how I could write ORM scaffolding by hand or just let the code gen write it, I see AI as nothing more than a keyboard extension, the amount of freedom you give it depends on the instruction/prompt

by gaiagraphia4 hours ago|

prev|

[-]

>impactful

Programming is the art of automation, and is being taken to new levels. It'd be quite damming to the field if a substantial % of the world's output over many decade hadn't brought us here, tbh.

Were builders crying when the Hagia Sophia was built? Projects come and go, nothing is forever.