[thisissomething]

> how can I utilize AI without degenerating my own abilities?

Couldn't the same statement, to some extent, be applied to using a sorting lib instead of writing your own sorting algorithm? Or how about using a language like python instead of manually handling memory allocation and garbage collection in C?

> What I want above all is AI that helps me become better at my job and continue to build skills and knowledge

So far, on my experience, the quality of what AI outputs is directly related to the quality of the input. I've seen some AI projects made by junior devs that a incredibly messy and confusing architecture, despite they using the same language and LLM model that I use? The main difference? The AI work was based on the patterns and architecture that I designed thanks to my knowledge, which also happens to ensure that the AI will produce less buggy software.

[xphos]

I think their is a huge difference between using a library and using python instead of C/Rust etc. You use those because they are fundementally more efficient at the expense of having to worry about efficient memory use. Robust programming is a trade off and the speed of development might be worth it but it also could be so problematic that the project just never works. A sort library is an abstraction over sorting its extension to your language pool you now have the fundemental operator sort(A). Languages kind of transend the operator difference.

I think the problem the OP is trying to get at is that if we only program at the level of libs we lose the ability to build fundementally cooler/better things. Not everyone does that of course but AI is not generating fundementally new code its copy pasting. Copy Pasting has its limits especially for people in the long term. Copy paste coders don't build game engines. They don't write operating systems. These are esototeric to some people as how many people actually write those things! But there is a craftsmanship lost in converting more people to Copy Paste all be it with inteligence.

I personally lean on the side that this type of abstraction over thinking is problematic long term. There is a lot damage being done on people not necessiarly in Coding but in Reading/Writing especially in (9-12 grade + college). When we ask people to write essays and read things, AI totally short circuits the process but the truth is no one gets any value in the finished product of an essay about "Why columbus coming to the new world cause X,Y or Z". The value is from the process of thinking that used to be required to generate that essay. This is similar to the OPs worry. You can say well we can do both and think about it as we review AI outputs. But human's are lazy. We don't mull over the calculator thinking about how some value is computed something we take it and run. I think there is lot more value/thinking in the application of the calculated results so calculator didn't destroy mathematical thinking but the same is not necessiarly true in how AI is being applied. The fact of your observation of inn junior dev's output proves support to my view. We are short circuiting the thinking. If those juniors can learn the patterns than there is no issue but it's not guarenteed. I think the uncertainity is the the OPs worry but maybe restated in a better way.

Love to hear your thoughts!

[em-bee]

no, it's more like asking a junior dev to write the sorting algorithm instead of writing it yourself. using a library would be like using an already verified and proven one algorithm. that's not what AI code provides.