[ZsoltT]

coding was never supposed to be fun, it was supposed to be instrumental

you interface with a machine to get the machine to do what you, a human, want it to do relevant to your human purposes

but out of necessity - turns out we need to control a lot of machines - we made the act ergonomic

this fit the aesthetic of some people. All to do with them and little to do with the act. Akin to alchemists or other purveyors of exotic knowledge, the relevance of their skill always had a countdown on it

all that's left is to circle back. Coding is instrumental. Now our alchemy is one more level abstracted from the artifice of the machine. Good. It's closer to people now - like management, now. That's bad for the current generation of alchemist but good for the world

earnest RIP. On the upside, there's always a next generation

[GPerson]

I’ve done a lot of vibe coding and I just can’t understand these takes. Pure vibe coding is not going to get you to a good result, so the alchemist you describe is still very much essential, and as far as I can see will be for a very long time.

[bitwize]

Not really. You have to pivot to a systems designer role and articulate in detail what you want to build, but the building of it is now effectively automated. Most programmers are not ready for this shift in mindset. Their perceptions of their own competence (hence value to organization, hence self-worth) are tied to writing the code. Hence why AI-assisted coding seems so unfun.

[GPerson]

Rigorously designing and understanding the system does not sound like what you were referring to in the original post.

All of my heroes always said the difficult part is not in the writing of the code, but in the reading/understanding of it.

[bitwize]

Check again, m8. I did not write the post you replied to. I'm offering my own thoughts.