[lieks]

I have different reasons for avoiding AI.

I enjoy understanding what my programs do to the deepest level, so making or using AI are both boring; they remove the fun part of programming and leave only the boring parts (mainly debugging). I haven't liked the current ML field since the beginning (early 2010s in my case) for this reason.

I want a tool, not a slave. I don't want it to be "smart", but an extension of my body. A thinking body part is always more annoying to deal with, because you have to reverse-engineer what it's doing to get it to do what you want.

I don't think this reasoning applies to everyone. I think it's fine for other people to use ML algorithms. I just don't want them myself.

[omnimus]

Also dont forget about deskilling. Right now its fine because you are able to debug. But it would get gradualy lot harder if you are not flexing that muscle.

[lucb1e]

> Also dont forget about deskilling

de-skilling (reducing skills), not desk killing, for anyone else as illiterate as me

[TiredOfLife]

>I want a tool, not a slave. I don't want it to be "smart", but an extension of my body.

Yup, that is exactly what AI autocomplete is. AI does the boring parts, you do the thinking.

>I haven't liked the current ML field since the beginning (early 2010s in my case) for this reason.

That is your problem. You are stuck in 2010s. But the last couple years have had giant enormous leaps.

[ghaff]

Since you need to understand your programs at the deepest level I assume you write in assembly and don’t use third party libraries.

[zahlman]

There was an era when car owners were expected to be their own mechanics.

When that started going away, I wonder if the people who lamented the loss ever got hit with "I assume you fractionate your own petroleum".

"Deepest level" in GP presumably refers to the deepest level of the existing source code.

[archagon]

Layers of abstraction vs. predigested programming slop.