Well, I can ask you the same question. I don't see how you can make money using AI in the foreseeable future too. Even if it is possible today, once the critical mass of people will master this technology, the opportunity gone.
In the past there was a "human computer" profession[^1] where people earn money for calculating by hand. Soon they were replaced by just normal computers. But computers were rare and expensive. Not everyone could afford of having one. So, there was a period of time where the big business had an opportunity. This opportunity also gone, once the home computers widespread.
The businesses may be in advantage of selling products made with AI. But I foresee that the value of these products will degrade eventually, because everyone will manage to do more or less the same at home. Ordinary software will no longer be a thing you can sell or advertise easily.
You would have to try harder to produce something unordinary. And even if you do, it will be very easy to replicate for competitors using AI.
I think that maybe not today but in a few years the Internet will be full of generated content most users wouldn't trust, and wouldn't be interested in mostly. And there will be no novel ideas available for public, because any know-how will be carefully hidden.
To conclude, it's not just about "code quality". If you are making something unusual you can make by hand, that the AI cannot imaging, you have very serious reasons not to disclose it in a new reality.
From the purely utilitary position maybe you are right, but my point was about arts and entertainment. Using the content generation tools might be useful in certain situations, but it's not joyful when the robots do the job for you.
Imaging that you purchase a video game, but then use LLM to play this game for you. Another example is Chess. Stockfish is more efficient than most Chess players, but playing Chess using programming assistant (even a little bit) is no longer a sport competition.
I also agree that not everyone like programming, and see it just as a job to be done.
I'm currently working on a project similar to Tree-Sitter.
Basically, it is going to be a full-featured Compiler front-end foundation library with incremental parsing capabilities, error recovering, AST manipulations, etc, but written entirely in Rust, and hopefully with more user-friendly API for Rust devs.
May I ask you to give me some feedback on your experience with Tree Sitter, and the challenges you faced during the development of your compiler's front-end?
In the past there was a "human computer" profession[^1] where people earn money for calculating by hand. Soon they were replaced by just normal computers. But computers were rare and expensive. Not everyone could afford of having one. So, there was a period of time where the big business had an opportunity. This opportunity also gone, once the home computers widespread.
The businesses may be in advantage of selling products made with AI. But I foresee that the value of these products will degrade eventually, because everyone will manage to do more or less the same at home. Ordinary software will no longer be a thing you can sell or advertise easily.
You would have to try harder to produce something unordinary. And even if you do, it will be very easy to replicate for competitors using AI.
I think that maybe not today but in a few years the Internet will be full of generated content most users wouldn't trust, and wouldn't be interested in mostly. And there will be no novel ideas available for public, because any know-how will be carefully hidden.
To conclude, it's not just about "code quality". If you are making something unusual you can make by hand, that the AI cannot imaging, you have very serious reasons not to disclose it in a new reality.
[1]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Computer_(occupation)