[donatj]

> it depends on what you enjoy: the journey or the destination

This has been 100% my experience. I enjoy the puzzle solving and the general joy of organizing and pulling things together. I could really care less about the end result to meet some business need. The fun part is in the building, it's in the understanding, the growth of me.

I have coworkers who get itchy when they don't see their work on production, and super defensive in code review but I've never really cared. The goal is to solve the puzzle. If there's a better way to solve the puzzle, I want to know. If it takes a week to get through code review, what do I care, I'm already off to the next puzzle.

Being forced to use Claude at work, it really just took away everything that was enjoyable. Instead of solving puzzles I'm wrangling a digital junior dev that doesn't really learn from its mistakes, and lies all the time.

[voxleone]

I've been coding since I was about 15 and still love it. These days I mostly build tailored applications for small and medium companies, often alone and sometimes with small ad-hoc teams. I also do the sales myself, in person. For me, not using LLMs would mean giving up a lot of productivity. But the way I use them is very structured. Work on an application starts with requirements appraisal: identifying actors, defining use cases, and understanding the business constraints. Then I design the objects and flows. When possible, I formalize the system with fairly strict axioms and constraints.

Only after that do LLMs come in, mostly to help with the mechanical parts of implementation. In my experience it's still humans all the way down. The thinking, modeling, and responsibility for the system are human. The LLM just helps move the implementation faster.

I also suspect the segment I work in will be among the last affected by LLM-driven job displacement. My clients are small to medium companies that need tailored internal systems. They're not going to suddenly start vibe-coding their own software. What they actually need is someone to understand the business, define the model, and take responsibility for the system. LLMs help with the implementation, but that part was never the hard part of the job.

[jantb]

I’m doing the same as you and even though I was producing coding a lot of the actual products I estimated the coding part just to be about 20% of the work. The rest is figuring out what and how to build stuff and what stakeholders really need, and solving production issues in live event driven systems. Agentic coding is just faster at the 20% part, and I can always sit down and code the really hard stuff if I want to or feel I need to if the LLM gets stuck. If it produces something not understandable I either learn from it until I understand it og makes it do a pattern I know instead. So all in all, not so worried.

[finaard]

> This has been 100% my experience. I enjoy the puzzle solving and the general joy of organizing and pulling things together. I could really care less about the end result to meet some business need. The fun part is in the building, it's in the understanding, the growth of me.

Quite a few of the projects I always wanted to do have components or dependencies I really don't want to do. And as a result, I never did them, unless they eventually became viable to do in a commercial setting where I then had some junior developer to make the annoying stuff go away.

Now with LLMs I have my own junior developer to handle the annoying stuff - and as a result, a lot of my fun stuff I was thinking about in the last 3 decades finally got done.

One example from just last week - I had a large C codebase from the 90s I always wanted to reuse, but modern compilers have a different idea of how C should look like. It's pretty obvious from the compiler errors what you need to do each case, but I wasn't really in the mood for manually going through hundreds of source files. So I just stuck a locally running qwen coder in yolo mode into a container, forgot about it for a week, and came back to a compiling code base. Diff is quick to review, only had a handful of cases where it needed manual intervention.

[throw-the-towel]

Note that you are able to choose freely what parts of the work get done by Claude, and what parts you do yourself. At work, many of us have no such luxury because bosses drunk on FOMO are forcing agent use.

[finaard]

Yeah, I've noticed at several customers that they're just trying to cram LLMs into everything, instead of maybe first thinking if it's sensible for that specific usecase.

I'm also doing some things where I don't think LLMs are not a good fit - but I'm doing it because I care to see about things like failure behaviour, how to identify when it is looping (which can be sometimes hard to see when using huge context models) and similar stuff - which results in more knowledge about when it makes sense to use LLMS. No such learnings visible at many customers, even if LLMs do something stupid.

[93n]

> The fun part is in the building, it's in the understanding, the growth of me.

I agree with this sentiment as well. Without a doubt, my favorite part of the job is coming up with a solution that just 'feels right', especially when said solution is much cleaner than brute force/naive approach. It sounds cheesy, but it truly is one of my favorite sensations.

I'm the senior-most engineer on my team of about 15. I try to emphasize software craftsmanship, which resonates with some but not all. We have a few engineers who have seemingly become reliant on AI tooling, and I struggle with them. Some of them are trying to push code that they clearly don't understand and aren't reviewing, and I think they're setting themselves up for failure due to lack of growth.

[specproc]

One hundred percent.

I came back into tech professionally over the last decade. Always been into computers, but the first decade or so of my career was in humanitarian amin. Super interesting sector, super boring day-to-day.

Getting back into code felt like coming home. I'm good at it, I really enjoy it, the problem-solving aspect totally lights up my brain in this amazing way.

I feel exactly the same way. Totally robbed of pleasure at work, with the added kicker of mass layoffs hanging over the sector.

At least OP is sixty, I've got 25 years of work left and I really don't know what to do. I hate it all so much.

[throw310822]

Oh wow, that's exactly the opposite of how I feel, and conversely, I am that developer who gets itchy when his work doesn't go to prod quickly enough and gets defensive on code reviews.

Sure, part of the fun of programming is understanding how things work, mentally taking them apart and rebuilding them in the particular way that meets your needs. But this is usually reserved for small parts of the code, self-contained libraries or architectural backbones. And at that level I think human input and direction are still important. Then there is the grunt work of glueing all the parts together, or writing some obvious logic, often for the umpteenth time- these are things I can happily delegate. And finally there are the choices you make because you think of the final product and of the experience of those who will use it- this is not a puzzle to solve at all, this is creative work and there is no predefined result to reach. I'm happy to have tools that allow me to get there faster.

[sktrdie]

You still care about end result though: in your case, the end result being the puzzled you solved.

AI can make that process still enjoyable. For instance I had to build a very intricate cache handler for Next.js from scratch that worked in a very specific way by serializing JSON in chunks (instead of JSON.parse it all in memory). I knew the theory, but the API details and the other annoyances always made it daunting for me.

With AI I was able to thinker more about the theory of the problem and less about the technical implementation which made the process much more fun and doable.

Perhaps we're just climbing the ladder of abstraction: in the early days people were building their own garbage collection mechanisms, their own binary search algorithms, etc. Once we started using libraries, we had to find the fun in some higher level.

Perhaps in the future the fun will be about solving puzzles within the realm of requirement definitions and all the intricacies that stem from that.

[mike_slinn]

"wrangling a digital junior dev that doesn't really learn from its mistakes, and lies all the time" SO TRUE!

[sixtyj]

This dev thinks that it knows everything /s

[jebarker]

I agree with you. I try to remember though that this is just the same situation that artists, musicians and (more recently) writers have been in for a long time. Unless you’re one of a very lucky few you’ll only get fulfillment in those pursuits if you enjoy the process rather than the output since it’s hard to get money or recognition for output anymore. Pure coding and lots of areas of code problem solving are going to end up in the same position.

[parpfish]

I feel like I still get to solve the puzzles I like because I like the higher level architecture/design parts. I just don’t have to type as much because I can provide a stubbed out solution and tell it to fill I the rest.

[leekrasnow]

Adapting the workflow to this new paradigm is a different sort of puzzle. I think that the folks whom enjoy agentic pair programming have found various satisfactory solutions. As a puzzle enthusiast myself, I have been particularly enjoying this pivotal moment in technology because of how many opportunities there are to create novel approaches to combat the lies and mistakes.

[fastasucan]

This is me as well. I am actively seeking out a different line of work, because talking to a chat bot gives me 0 joy.

[markus_zhang]

From my understanding, you can instead use Claude in the following manner: understand and solve the problem, put up pseudo code, and then tell Claude to generate real code and maybe restructure it a bit. So you don't have to write the actual code but have solved the problem all by yourself.

[fastasucan]

"So you dont have to" - I suspect the person you are replying to likes to write code.

[markus_zhang]

> This has been 100% my experience. I enjoy the puzzle solving and the general joy of organizing and pulling things together. I could really care less about the end result to meet some business need.

I don't really see where he/she said that explicitly. My understanding is that he likes to solve problems but don't care about the final implementation. But I stand corrected.

[parpfish]

If you worked in an office and your boss asked for 100 copies of their memo, they want you to use the copy machine.

If they saw you typing it out 100 times they’d tell you that you’re wasting time. It does t matter that you like to type and that you went to school to get a degree in typing.

[raw_anon_1111]

Your company isn’t paying you to solve puzzles. If you aren’t putting things into production, what good are you as an employee?

> Being forced to use Claude at work, it really just took away everything that was enjoyable. Instead of solving puzzles I'm wrangling a digital junior dev that doesn't really learn from its mistakes, and lies all the time.

Claude very much learns if you teach it and tell it to note things in the CLAUDE.md files you want it to remember. Claude is much better than any junior and most mid level ticket takers.

[bayindirh]

> Your company isn’t paying you to solve puzzles. If you aren’t putting things into production, what good are you as an employee?

No, the company is exactly paying their employees to solve puzzles, which company labels them as problems or requirements.

And when an employee focuses on solving puzzles and enjoys it, the code naturally ends up in production, and gets forgotten because the puzzle is solved well.

[raw_anon_1111]

And if they could solve the problem faster with AI?

But there is no “puzzle” to solving most enterprise problems as far as code - just grind.

And code doesn’t magically go from dev to production without a lot of work and coordination in between.

[bluefirebrand]

> And if they could solve the problem faster with AI

It's such a shame that everyone only cares about "faster" and not "better"

What a shameful mentality. Absolutely zero respect for quality or craftsmanship, only speed

[raw_anon_1111]

I care about exchanging labor for money to support my addiction to food and shelter.

My employer just like any other employer cares about keeping up with the competition and maximizing profit.

Customers don’t care about the “craftsmanship” of your code - aside from maybe the UI. But if you are a B2B company where the user is not the customer, they probably don’t even care about that.

I bet you most developers here are using the same set of Electron apps.

[bluefirebrand]

Yes, what you are describing is both true and also highlights how bankrupt we are as a society

Just because things are this way doesn't mean they should be or that we should just accept that they must always be this way

[skydhash]

There still is. In most enterprises, the tasks are usually to take some data somewhere, transform it to be the intake of another process. Or to made a tweak to an existing process. Most of the other types of problems (information storage, communication, accounting,..) have been solved already (and solved before the digital world).

People can see it as grind. But the pleasure comes in solving the meta problem instead of the one in front (the latter always create brittle systems). But I agree that it can becomes hell if there were no care in building the current systems.

[raw_anon_1111]

And they are tasks with standardized best practices. I knew that I wanted to write an internal web app that allowed users to upload a file to S3 using Lambda and storing the CSV rows into Postgres.

I just told it to do it.

It got the “create S3 pre-signed url to upload it to” right. But then it did the naive implementation of download the file and do a bulk upsetting wrong instead of “use the AWS extension to Postgres and upload it to S3”. Once I told it to do that, it knew what to do.

But still I cared about systems and architecture and not whether it decided to use a for loop or while loop.

Knowing that or knowing how best to upload files to Redshift or other data engineering practices aren’t knew or novel

[skydhash]

They aren’t. But there are a lot of mistakes that can happen, and until an AI workflow is proven that it can’t happen, it’s best to monitor it, and then the speed increase is moot. Hunans can make the same kind of mistakes, but they are incentivized not to (loosing reputation and their jobs). AI tools don’t have that lever against them.

[nly]

> Your company isn’t paying you to solve puzzles.

Actually they are, but it's also true that you need to put solutions in to production.

[raw_anon_1111]

No your company is very much paying you to put things in production. Thats all they care about

[bayindirh]

No the company wants its problems to be solved and needs to be addressed.

When things are put to production as soon as possible without respect to quality, we see what's happening all the time.

Bloat, performance problems, angry customers, Windows 11...

You get the idea.

[raw_anon_1111]

The reason your login is taking 45 seconds and your database is locking up with 10 concurrent users isn’t because developers didn’t write good code following the correct GOF pattern.

If companies cared about bloat and performance you wouldn’t see web apps with dozens of dependencies, cross platform mobile apps and Electron apps.

[nly]

Putting solutions in to production. Not "things". Honestly I'm sick of dogshit companies wanting something done yesterday but are happy to spend the next 2 years having engineers debug the consequences.

I've just written the fifth from-scratch version of a component at work. The requirements have never changed (it's a client library for a proprietary server, which has barely ever changed). I'm the 5th developer at the company to write a version of it.

All because nobody gave engineers the breathing room to factor the solution in to well thought out, testable, reusable components. Every version before is a spaghetti soup of code, mixing up unrelated functionality in to a handful of files.

No well thought out interfaces. No automated end-to-end testing, and no automated regression testing. The whole thing is dire and no managers give a fuck.

AI cannot solve for a lack of engineering culture. It can however produce trash faster than ever at these toxic shops.

[raw_anon_1111]

And this has nothing to do with AI like you said. On another project my vibe coded API that I designed I also didn’t look at a line of code besides the shell script I had Claude create to do the integration tests with curl.

On the other hand, AI doesn’t care about sloppy code. I haven’t done any serious web development since 2002, yet I created two decently featureful internal websites without looking at a line of code authenticated with Amazon Cognito. I doubt for the lifetime of this app, anyone will ever look at a line of code and make any changes using AI.