I sympathize completely with you, but.. they robbed you of these moments of enjoying the art of programming itself at your day job.
You are still free to enjoy it in your free time, just like I enjoy drawing or guitar playing in my free time. The loss we have experienced is the luxury of doing at work something we enjoy for its own sake.
Yes precisely. In my eyes the lack of objective answers in much of philosophy makes it an easy target for humans getting lost in their own "rationality". People vastly overestimate their ability to reason and draw conclusions about abstract concepts that really lack strong definitions.
Some philosophy study is very good for raising the questions one should always ponder in life, but building a career on philosophy very easily leads you astray.
I have studied philosophy, literature and physics. In literature you know everything is made up, that is the point of literature, creating art, but in philosophy many people make up things and then pretend they are real. Objective ethics? Postulating the nature of reality? Please.
I hope you can find joy again. People like you, who value the human side, are needed in this world. I agree that in recent years it has been going the wrong way, but to change it we have to work together.
The kids are smarter than many of us think. We owe to them a world where they can feel hope and see a future. But much of the AI hype is built around declaring how dangerous and futile everything is.
The students cheering Woz is not about truth but about hope.
But it also means we solve the same problems as before but faster, meaning less time is given to planning and thinking about what to actually build. This is a real problem where I work. Everyones grasp of what we are building and how it is connected is markedly worse nowadays.
We as a collective must learn the skill to put these new abilities to good use instead of just aiming to accelerate as much as possible.
> We don't necessarily need hard separation of planning and coding, but we need a deliberate separation of experimental/explorative coding and the code that is supposed to make it into prod. AI coding does all that in the same place ...
This is a very good point. The AI speedup some PMs fantasize about is skipping planning and instead generate code directly from end user discussions, POC-ing our way into shipping.
What, no, maybe I am missing something but as these steps to get good results? I don't need them all, and some/many seem just like common sense or too specific. Like "72 steps to mow your lawn".
Like said so many times before, if setting up your AI agent is very complicated, A: you are misled and B: six months from now you won't need all the stuff anyway.
I think one side of the issues folks are having is that combined with the mandate to use these tools, there is also an expectation or assumption that the developers will instantly get X% more productive. Like, "you must use this tool and you will be twice as productive".
Where I work there as certainly been that kind of discussions, "we need to use AI for this, because no offense but you are simply not fast enough". And this from people who do not understand software development and has never worked with it. They have only read the online stuff about 20X speeds and FOMO. (And my workplace is generally quite laid back and reasonable. I am sure many other places are much more aggressively steered.)