[coffeefirst]

> you will stagnate if you don't learn to use the new tools effectively.

This is the first technology in my career where the promoters feel the need to threaten everyone who expresses any sort of criticism, skepticism, or experience to the contrary.

It is very odd. I do not care for it.

[mapontosevenths]

How old is your career then? I've been hearing some variation on "evolve or die" for about 30 years now, and it's been true every time... Except for COBOL. Some of those guys are still doing the same thing they were back then. Literally everything else has changed and the people that didn't keep up are gone.

[jennyholzer3]

"you will stagnate if you don't learn to use the new tools effectively."

this hostile marketing scheme is the reason for my hostile opposition to LLMs and LLM idiots.

LLMs do not make you smarter or a more effective developer.

You are a sucker if you buy into the hype.

[mapontosevenths]

Are you arguing that you can work in technology without learning new things?

Have you considered a career in plumbing? Their technology moves at a much slower rate and does not require you to learn new things.

[coffeefirst]

No... nobody has ever argued that.

There's a debate to be had about what any given new technology is good for and how to use it because they all market themselves as the best thing since sliced bread. Fine. I use Sonnet all the time as a research tool, it's kind of great. I've also tried lots of stuff that doesn't work.

But the attitude towards everyone who isn't an AI MAXIMALIST does not persuade anyone or contribute to this debate in any useful way.

Anyway if I get kicked out of the industry for being a heretic I think I'll go open an Italian restaurant. That could be fun.

[mapontosevenths]

> There's a debate to be had about what any given new technology is good for and how to use it

Fair enough. It's reasonable to debate it, and I'll agree that it's almost certainly overhyped at the moment.

That said, folks like the GP who say that "LLMs do not make you smarter or a more effective developer" are just plain wrong. They've either never used a decent one, or have never learned to use one effectively and they're blaming the tool instead of learning.

I know people with ZERO programming experience who have produced working code that they use every day. They literally went from 0% effective to 100% effective. Arguing that it didn't happen for them (and the thousands of others just like them) is just factually incorrect. It's not even debatable to anyone who is being honest with themselves.

It's fair to say that if you're already a senior dev it doesn't make you super-dev™, but I doubt anyone is claiming that. For "real devs" they're claiming relatively modest improvements, and those are very real.

> Anyway if I get kicked out of the industry for being a heretic I think I'll go open an Italian restaurant.

I doubt anyone will kick you out for having a differing opinion. They'll more likely kick you out for being less productive than the folks who learned to use the new tools effectively.

Either way, the world can always use another Italian restaurant, or another plumber. :)

[jennyholzer3]

I'm arguing that LLMs are overhyped garbage which frankly seem like a dead end for someone pursuing a career in software development