[LandR]

What do you mean? Chess engines are incredibly far ahead of humans right now.

Even a moderately powered machine running stockfish will destroy human super gms.

Sorry, after reading replies to this post i think I've misunderstood what you meant :)

[hollerith]

I think he knows that. There was a period from the early 1950s (when people first started writing chess-playing software) to 1997 when humans were better at chess than computers were, and I think he is saying that we are still in the analogous period for the skill of programming.

But he should've know that people would jump at the opportunity to contradict him and should've written his comment so as not to admit such an easily-contradictable interpretation.

[LandR]

Yes, amended my post. I understand what he was saying now. Thanks.

Wasn't trying to just be contradictory or arsey

[seadan83]

The phrasing was perhaps a bit odd. For a while, humans were better at Chess, until they weren't. OP is hypothesizing it will be a similar situation for programming. To boot, it was hard to believe for a long time that computers would ever be better than a humans at chess.