[rrook]

> My theory is that this is a source of diverging views on LLMs for programming: people who see programming languages as tools for thought compared to people who see programming languages as, exclusively, tools to make computers do stuff. It's no surprise that the former would see more value in programming qua programming, while the latter are happy to sweep code under the rug.

i'd postulate this: most people see llms as tools for thought. programmers also see llms as tools for programming. some programmers, right now, are getting very good at both, and are binding the two together.

[jaredcwhite]

Most people? I'd suggest few people see LLMs as tools for thought and more that they're slop machines being cynically forced upon workers by capitalists with dollar signs in their eyes. Over and over and over again we see real-world studies showing that the people far more excited about genAI are managers than the people doing the actual work.

[rrook]

i mean - i think people recognize that they are pattern matching tools. pattern matching is useful for thinking.