[quantum2022]

You're missing the forest for the trees. It speeds up people who don't know how to program 100%. We could see a flourishing of ideas and programs coming out of 'regular' people. The kind of people that approach programmers with the 'I have an idea' and get ignored. Maybe the programs will be basic, but they'll be a template for something better, which then a programmer might say 'I see the value in that idea' and help develop it.

It'll increase incremental developments manyfold. A non-programmer spending a few hours on AI to make their workflow better and easier and faster. This is what everyone here keeps missing. It's not the programmers that should be using AI; it's 'regular' people.

[LEDThereBeLight]

Great point, one that I think gets missed when you write code for a living and are comfortable with the ecosystem. But I remember when I was getting started making projects - even figuring out what I needed to google to get unblocked could feel impossible. I think AI will help bring a lot of people who are “on the border” between building something with code or giving up on the idea the boost over that line.

[aranelsurion]

I think that was the point they made.

If AI enables regular folks to make programs, even if the worst quality shovelware, there should’ve been an explosion in quantity. All the programs that people couldn’t made, they would start making them in the past two years.

[Gormo]

> It speeds up people who don't know how to program 100%.

I'm not sure how that challenges the point of the article, which is that metrics of the total volume of code being publicly released is not increasing. If LLMs are opening the door to software development for many people whose existing skills aren't yet sufficient to publish working code, then we'd expect to see a vast expansion in the code output by such people. If that's not happening, why not?