[DiscourseFan]

I don’t know if that’s true, I made a little web app for displaying the schedule for my team based on our billable hours, and I didn’t do any of the scripting myself but I did have to think a lot about what the app would do and what it would look like and what kind of functionality I wanted, tradeoffs between functionality and specific use cases, etc. It just made the scripting part go faster, that’s all.

[Planktonne]

That's still less thinking overall that someone who thought about all of that and thought about the scripting would have done.

[IanCal]

And even less than someone who wrote an interpreter for the script, less than someone who also chanted times tables while doing it.

More thinking isn’t a simple good thing. Given a limit to how much thought I can give any specific task, adding extra work may mean less where it’s most useful.

[Planktonne]

That's not a good-faith argument; obviously we're talking about relevant thought, rather than distraction (which, in context, would be less thought).

[IanCal]

It is a good faith argument, my point is exactly that the actual scripting was not part of the relevant thought any more than the interpreter would have been.

[eddieroger]

That adds up over time, though, and it works in reverse. AI will always be able to read and write faster than a person can. You may be able to write the script, but in the time it would take to /literally/ write it, you're on to the next thing. And if that script is actually a feature that spans two or three or 10 files, now you're really cooking.