[nenenejej]

OK: AI is slow when using the said loop. AI is like poker. You bet with time. 60 seconds to type prompt and generate a response. Oh it is wrong ok let's gamble another 60 seconds...

At least when doing stuff the old way you learn something if you waste time.

That said AI is useful enough and some poker games are +EV.

So this is more caution-AI than anti-AI take. It is more an anti-vibe-koolaid take.

[lukaslalinsky]

This depends entirely on how you use said AI. You can have it read code, explain why was it done this or that way, and once it has the context you ask to think about implementing feature X. There is almost no gambling involved there, at best the level frustration you would have with a colleague. If you start from blank context, tell it to implement full app, you are purely just gambling.

[skydhash]

> You can have it read code, explain why was it done this or that way,

The thing is that, once you're experienced enough, it's faster to just glance at the code and have the answer right, instead of playing the guessing game with AI.

> and once it has the context you ask to think about implementing feature X

I'm always amazed at someone using that methodology. When I think about a feature, first is to understand the domain, second is which state I'm like to start from and where all the data are. If you don't get these two steps right, what you'll have is a buggy/incomplete implementation. And if you do get these steps right, the implementation is likely trivial.