[ilovetux]

It's my opinion that AI can help a lot when it is supporting you when expanding beyond your core competency.

For instance, as a SWE, I get just a little help with boilerplate from the AI. I could usually have done it better, but sometimes the ask is both simple enough and boring enough that the code from the LLM actually produces something very close to what I would produce.

On the other side of the coin, a non-technical person using AI would be unable to properly understand and review the output.

Where it shines is on things that I am OK at. Like writing marketing copy. I can get by myself, but its slightly outside of my wheelhouse, but as long as I have a solid understanding of the product I can use AI to compliment my beginner/intermediate skills and produce something better than I would produce on my own.

A similar thing is writing tutorials. I write some code and documentation, but the tutorials are enough of a slog that I get distracted by my distaste for it. This is a good fit for AI.

I think this is where we will see AI help the most. Where someone's skillset includes the task at hand but at a secondary level where the user might doubt themselves or get distracted with the misery the task brings them.

[codpiece]

Respectfully, your positive view of an LLM writing marketing copy is akin to a marketer thinking an LLM codes really well.

[ilovetux]

I would push back on that because I have some experience writing marketing copy. It's just not my primary competency.

If the proverbial marketer that you were referring to had some experience with coding, I dont see why they wouldnt be able to review the output and see any obvious flaws.

My whole point is that LLMs are of limited use when you are already an expert or when you know nothing about the subject. However, they really seem to help elevate beginner/intermediate level tangential skillsets.

Obviously everything is still evolving and your results may vary.