[viraptor]

Cut it out with patronising, I work with complex software, which is why I specifically mentioned the only example I published was simple.

> but your examples are not very good to show that "software projects that somehow are 100% human developed will not be competitive with AI assisted or written projects"

Here's the thing though - it's already the case, because I wouldn't create those tools but hand otherwise. I just don't have the time, and they're too personal/edge-case to pay anyone to make them. So the comparison in this case is between 100% human developed non-existent software and AI generated project which exists. The latter wins in every category by default.

[a57721]

My apologies, I didn't want to sound patronizing and wasn't making assumptions about your work and experience based on your examples, I am happy that generative AI allows you to make such apps. However, they are very similar to the demos that are always presented as showcases.

[Dylan16807]

I don't think they're being patronizing, it's that "simple personal app that was barely worth making" is nice to have but not at all what they want evidence of.

[viraptor]

Whether it was worth making is for me to judge since it is a personal app. It improves my life and work, so yes, it was very much worth it.

[Dylan16807]

You said you wouldn't have made it if it took longer, isn't that a barely?

But either way it's not an example of what they wanted.