| "Am I a dinosaur?" - I think you're asking the most important question for our craft in 2025. Thank you. I lead a team building Markhub, an AI-native workspace, and we have this debate internally all the time. Our conclusion is that there are two types of "thinking" in programming: "Architectural Thinking": This is the joy you're talking about. The deep, satisfying process of designing systems, building mental models, and solving a core problem. This is the creative work, and an AI getting in the way of this feels terrible. We agree that this part should be protected. "Translational Thinking": This is the boring, repetitive work. Turning a clear idea into boilerplate code, writing repetitive test cases, summarizing a long thread of feedback into a list of tasks, or refactoring code. This is the work we want to delegate. Our philosophy is that AI should not replace Architectural Thinking; it should eliminate Translational Thinking so that we have more time for the joyful, deep work. For your mental model problem, our solution has been to use our AI, MAKi, not to write the core logic, but to summarize the context around the logic. For example, after a long discussion about a new feature, I ask MAKi to "summarize this conversation and extract the action items." The AI handles the "what," freeing me up to focus on the "how." You are not a dinosaur. You are protecting the part of the work that matters most. |