[unshavedyak]

I agree, but i think the thing we often miss in these discussions is how much LLMs have potential to be productivity multipliers.

Yea, they still need to improve a bit - but i suspect there will be a point at which individual devs could be getting 1.5x more work done in aggregate. So if everyone is doing that much more work, it has potential to "take the job" of someone else.

Yea, software is being needed more and more and more, so perhaps it'll just make us that much more dependent on devs and software. But i do think it's important to remember that productivity always has potential to replace devs, and LLMs imo have huge potential in productivity.

[scuol]

Oh I agree it can be a multiplier for sure. I think it's not "AI will take your job" but rather "someone who uses AI well will take your job if you don't learn it".

At least for C++, I've found it does very mediocre at suggesting project code (because it has the tendency to drop in subtle bugs all over the place, you basically have to carefully review it instead of just writing it yourself), but asking things in copilot like "Is there any UB in this file?" (not that it will be perfect, but sometimes it'll point something out) or especially writing tests, I absolutely love it.

[unshavedyak]

Yea i'm a big fan of using it in Rust for that same reason. I watch it work through compile errors constantly, i can't imagine what it would be like in JS or Python