[Verdex]

I'm willing to accept this as a possibility but the case analysis still doesn't make much sense to me.

If LLM usage is easy then I can't be left behind because it's easy. I'll pick it up in a weekend.

If LLM usage is hard AND I can otherwise do the hard things that LLMs are doing then I can't be left behind if I just do the hard things.

Still the only way I can be left behind is if LLM usage is nonsense or the same as just doing it yourself AND the important thing is telling managers that you've been using it for a long time.

Is the superpower bamboozling management with story time?

[mquander]

The obvious case in which you would be "left behind" is the one in which LLM usage is hard, and you cannot otherwise do the hard things that LLMs are doing (or you can do them, but much slower and/or to a lower standard of quality.)

[Verdex]

Sure. Although all of the hard things that I need to do I have a history of doing fast and to high standards.

Unless we're talking about hard things that I have up til now not been able to do. But do LLMs help with that in general?

This scenario breaks out of the hypothetical and the assertive and into the realm of the testable.

Provide for me the person who can use LLMs in a way that is hard but they are good at in order to do things which are hard but which they are currently bad at.

I will provide a task which is hard.

We can report back the result.

[xnhbx]

> Provide for me the person who can use LLMs in a way that is hard but they are good at in order to do things which are hard but which they are currently bad at.

A PM using LLM to develop software product without DEV?

[Verdex]

This sounds like a hypothetical person, unless you have a particular PM who is willing to donate some time and their LLM account to run the experiment for us.

Also Im picking the problem. I have a few in mind but I would want to get the background of the person running the experiment first to ensure that the problem is something that we can expect to be hard for the person.