[palmotea]

> Thinking happens at least for me before I write. I know what I want to do before I write, and writing is just one medium to get it out there. If there was a faster way, to get my thoughts there I would use that.

A lot of people observe that their thoughts get better when they do the work to write them out. It's not just a straightforward encoding process (as maybe a software engineer would conceive of it).

[mewpmewp2]

Yes, it gets better, but not because of writing, it gets better because of building, playing it out and observing the results. The trial and error. It wouldn't matter whether I built via voice to command AI or wrote the code myself.

E.g. I iterate and see the architecture or the system work out, or I get other ideas because of something I don't like, etc.

[lelanthran]

> Yes, it gets better, but not because of writing, it gets better because of building, playing it out and observing the results. The trial and error. It wouldn't matter whether I built via voice to command AI or wrote the code myself.

This is a poor argument. The trial and error is the LLMs trial and error of your intention (ironically driven by you), not your trial and error.

It's like saying "It wouldn't matter if I instructed an LLM to solve my trigonometry problem or if I wrote the the solution myself; either way I'm learning trig".

> E.g. I iterate and see the architecture or the system work out, or I get other ideas because of something I don't like, etc.

What exactly are you needed for in this scenario, other than saying "make me $PRODUCT"? The LLm is going to be a lot better at architecture than you are. Your role is limited to A/B testing the result for human use.