[MrMcCall]

> This is no different from any other enabling technology.

Coding is unique. One can't replace considered, forward-thinking data flow design reasoning with fancy guesswork and triage.

Should anyone build a complex brick wall by just iterating over the possible solutions? Hell no. That's what expertise is for, and that is only attained via hard graft, and predicting the next word is not going to be a viable substitute.

It's all a circle jerk of people hoping for a magic box.

[Eisenstein]

When did you learn to code? What access did you have to technology when you started? How much free time did you have? What kind of education did you have?

Are you really unique because you are one of only a few special people who can code because of some innate ability? Or is it that you have above average intelligence, have a rather uncommon but certainly not rare ability to think a certain way, and had an opportunity and interest which honed those talents to do something most people can't?

How would you feel if you never had access to a computer with a dev environment until you were an adult, and then someone told you not to bother learning how to code because you aren't special like they are?

The 'magic box' is a way to get past the wall that requires people to spend 3 hours trying to figure out what python environments are before they can even write a program that does anything useful.

[skydhash]

I read a lot of books. While I had some fundamental in high school, I really started in college and the tricks was to read books for the theorical parts, read articles for advices and specific walkthroughs, read code for examples of implementation, and then solve problems to intenalize all of that reading.

But it all compounds. Going from reading to doing takes little time and I’m able to use much denser information repositories.

If you have to spend three hours reading about python environments, that’s just a signal that your foundation is lacking (you don’t know how your tools work). Using LLM is flying blind and hoping you will land instead of crashing.

[MrMcCall]

Well said.

One quibble, however, is that python environments are a mess (as is any 3rd party software use in any environment, in my limited experience), and I refuse to use any such thing, when at all possible. If I couldn't directly integrate that code into my codebase, I won't waste my time, because every dependency is another point of failure, either the author's or (more likely) that I might muck up my use of it. Then, there are issues such as versioning, security, and even the entire 3rd party management software itself. It does not look like it will actually save me any time, and might end up being a huge drag on my progression.

That said, using an LLM for ANYTHING is super risky IMO. Like you said, a person should read about what the think they want to utilize, and then incrementally build up the needed skills and experience by using it.

There are many paths in life that have ZERO shortcuts, but there are also many folks who refuse to acknowledge that difficult work is sometimes absolutely unavoidable.

[MrMcCall]

You must have replied to the wrong post, because I never said anything about myself being "unique" or otherwise differently talented than others, though that is possible. I don't measure myself against others; if they have a better insight into something I will gladly learn from them, without ego.

I'm talking about the fact that programming is a unique human endeavor, and a damned difficult one at that.

> How would you feel if you never had access to a computer with a dev environment until you were an adult, and then someone told you not to bother learning how to code because you aren't special like they are?

I would never say some stupid shit like that, to anyone, ever. If they want to do it, I would encourage them and give them basic advice to help them on their way. And I IN NO WAY believe that I am more talented at programming than ANYONE else on Earth. The experience I have earned from raw, hard graft across various programming environments and projects is my only advantage in a conversion about software development. But I firmly believe that a basic linux install and python, C, and bash will be enough to allow anyone to reach a level of basic professional proficiency.

You are WAY out of pocket here, my friend, or perhaps you just don't understand English very well.

> When did you learn to code? What access did you have to technology when you started? How much free time did you have? What kind of education did you have?

Getting to learn BASIC on an Apple (2e?) in 6th grade was fantastic for me; it was love at first goto. But having a C64 in 9th Grade was pivotal to the development of my fundamental skills and mindset, and I was very lucky to be in a nice house with the time to write programs for fun, and an 11th grade AP CS course with a very good teacher and TRS80s. But we were very much lower middle class, which factored into my choice of college and how well I did there. But, absolutely, I am a very, very lucky human being, yet tenacity via passion is the key to my success, and is not beyond ANYONE else.

> The 'magic box' is a way to get past the wall that requires people to spend 3 hours trying to figure out what python environments are before they can even write a program that does anything useful.

If you say so, but no one should be learning to program in a specific python env or doing anything "useful" except for personal exploration or rudimentary classwork.

Educating ourselves about how to logically program -- types, vars, fcts, files -- is our first "useful" programming any of us will be able to do for some years, which is no different than how an auto mechanic will ramp up to professional levels of proficiency, from changing oil to beyond.

With the internet in 2025, however, I'm sure people can learn more quickly, but if and only if they have the drive to do so.