[a254613e]

So cringy. Should we also add badges for doing it without autocomplete, syntax highlighting. Hell, why even bother with text, if you didn't develop it by punching cards then you're not a real developer.

[raspyberr]

I think you're being unreasonable. Your examples are closer to spellcheck and punctuation correction. Even they have subtle societal considerations such as Americanising English. A much more appropriate comparison would be Copilot which is being discussed nowadays.

[brookst]

It’s the same thing we heard from musicians who didn’t want to learn technology in the 70’s: using a synth or sequencer means it’s not “real music”.

Those purists are mostly dead. Everyone uses technology in music today. And music is better for it.

[squidsoup]

Synthesisers and sequencers don't write music for you, that's not a meaningful comparison.

[ask_b123]

There are still purist being born (not me tbf). And I'm glad for that.

[brookst]

Are there really still purists who don’t just reject technology for their own music, but who insist that any music that uses technology is somehow not real art? I haven’t met anybody like that in 30 years.

[datpiff]

> in the 70’s

> Those purists are mostly dead

Genius argument there buddy

[brookst]

I don’t understand the point of your insulting response. Younger generations grew up with technology. Just being part of music. Music goes on just fine, nobody makes that stupid argument anymore.

[buggy6257]

People born in the 70s are 53 at most. They are almost certainly not "mostly dead" yet.

[explaininjs]

Nobody said anything about people born in the 70's. They said "musicians who didn’t want to learn technology in the 70's", which is clearly different.

Those musicians were probably 30+ in the 70's, making them 83+ now. Life expectancy of someone who reaches 30 is 48 years, so yes: most of them are dead now.

[wrycoder]

And almost most of us are not.

[Eumenes]

I unironically agree