[marxism]

I think you're misunderstanding my point. I'm not saying I don't know how to use planning modes or iterate on solutions.

Yes, you still decompose problems. But what's the decomposition for? To create sub-problems small enough that the AI can solve them in one shot. That's literally what planning mode does - help you break things down into AI-solvable chunks.

You might say "that's not real thinking, that's just implementation details." Look who came up the the plan in the first place << It's the AI! Plan mode is partial automation of the thinking there too (improving every month)

Claude Code debugs something, it's automating a chain of reasoning: "This error message means execution reached this file. That implies this variable has this value. I can test this theory by sending this HTTP request. The logs show X, so my theory was wrong. Let me try Y instead."

[malux85]

> When I stop the production line to say "wait, let me understand what's happening here," the implicit response is: "Why are you holding up progress? It mostly works. Just ship it. It's not your code anyway."

This is not a technical problem or an AI problem, it’s a cultural problem where you work

We have the opposite - I expect all of our devs to understand and be responsible for AI generated code

[gooodvibes]

> But what's the decomposition for?

To get it done correctly, that's always what it's been about.

I don't feel that code I write without assistance is mine, or some kind of achievement to be proud of, or something that inflates my own sense of how smart I am. So when some of the process is replaced by AI, there isn't anything in me that can be hurt by that, none of this is mine and it never was.