[marifjeren]

Grateful for this essay. Made me feel seen.

Someone said:

> No one is stopping you from doing what you enjoy.

But that's wrong. LLMs are creating an environment in which some things are no longer enjoyable.

For example there is less joy to be had in learning a programming language in 2026 than there was in 2016, because there is less utility in it now.

[Lerc]

Why must this result in less joy.

Chess has utility in only the most abstract sense, yet people enjoy it.

Computers became better than humans, and some dispared, but more still enjoy it.

Computers provide insight into the problem, which leads to a greater enjoyment for many people. Instead of finding a move in a complex state and thinking 'I'll never know if that was the best move'. A good chess engine can give a reasonable suggestion of what the best move actually was.

It does take from you the feeling of being special.

We are no longer the only world in existence, we are no longer the center of the universe. We are no longer crafted by a all powerful benign being to be exactly how we should be to rule this world. We are no longer the only things that can play a good game of chess.

That hurts a sense of pride, but I'm not sure it was a worthy sense of pride.

[encyclopedism]

> Why must this result in less joy.

The parent's point is better articulated as: programming COUPLED with being paid do it is what is now less enjoyable due to AI.

You are free to enjoy pretty much anything but you may not necessarily be paid to do it.

> We are no longer the only world in existence, we are no longer the center of the universe.

Nothing has changed in this regard. We were the centre prior to AI then we still are after it. The human ability to comprehend makes us the centre. The squiggle: 8 means nothing to an ant but to a human it is the number eighth. AI is something only humans comprehend beyond that what does AI matter and to whom would it matter to?

[marifjeren]

> why must this result in less joy

Well I think you answered it:

To become a developer, I disciplined my mind to do impressive and useful things. The resulting feelings were pride and speciality and therefore sometimes joy.

And those feelings are gone now that software engineering has become a low-discipline, low-barrier to entry activity.

Am I immoral or vain for having derived joy from that -- I think is another matter, and one which doesn't resurrect the joy no matter how it's answered

[AnduCrandu]

Agreed. Something being potentially useful to myself or others is a major motivating factor in learning it. Other people thinking something is cool is a major motivating factor in creating it. If the things I can learn are useless, why learn? If the things I create are unimpressive, why create? I have never been one to create "for myself".

[nestorD]

> For example there is less joy to be had in learning a programming language in 2026 than there was in 2016, because there is less utility in it now.

I... disagree. The joy I get from learning a programming language does not come from knowing that it is useful. Rather, it comes from engaging with its abstractions and figuring out the associated mental puzzles.

On a related note, I recently realized that I am barely writing code these days (instead I am reviewing a lot of LLM-written code and nudging it in the right direction) which will make doing the advent of code (which I usually use to play with a language I have never used) without any LLM help even more enjoyable: it will be both the fun of figuring out those puzzles in a new language, and stretching my code-writing muscles.

[vouaobrasil]

> I... disagree. The joy I get from learning a programming language does not come from knowing that it is useful. Rather, it comes from engaging with its abstractions and figuring out the associated mental puzzles.

Fact is though, a LOT of people derive joy from showing their creations to other people and others finding utility or awe in it because they created it with their hands. The fact that a few of us can sidestep that does not mean it's a general phenomenon.

[satvikpendem]

Joy should not come from utility but its fundamentality of enjoyment. I still learn different programming languages because it's fun to do so, so sounds like it's a you problem.

[vouaobrasil]

> Joy should not come from utility but its fundamentality of enjoyment. I still learn different programming languages because it's fun to do so, so sounds like it's a you problem.

I learn because it's fun but PART of that learning also comes from having an environment to show off my new skills. I think a lot of people downplay this but it's inevitable and AI is ruining that environment.

[jlev1]

“You shouldn’t find joy from things the way you said you do. Sounds like a you problem.”

[satvikpendem]

Exactly. If they just do things for utility I struggle to see if they did it for joy in the first place. A painter still paints even if there is some perfect machine that can paint. This sounds like the same crisis many artists had when photography was invented.

[chrisbrandow]

Craft isn’t craft if it doesn’t produce something. So enjoying the utility of it is not a secondary aspect. That’s a key difference between craft and art.

[satvikpendem]

But the person above can produce something, they can still code by hand to make something. They're acting like that's not the case anymore.

[jonnybgood]

Interestingly, I have heard more of those who have regained their joy of programming because of LLMs.

[zarkov99]

For the most part those are people who were not previously able to create because of skill atrophy or lack of programming aptitude. From their point of view being able to command (for now) a more capable entity to do what they (think) they want is an improvement.

[shibaprasadb]

I get what you are saying, but your joy shouldn't always be utility-driven IMO.