This is a very flawed analogy.

Since when do we measure productivity by lines of code?

It’s not a measure of productivity, but some number of new lines is generally necessary for new functionality. And in my experience AI tends to produce more lines of code than a decent human for similar functionality. So I’d be very shocked if an agent completing a feature didn’t crank out 1500 lines or more.

Has AI generated any wealth?

There'd be a recession otherwise, no?

I think they meant the resulting LLMs, not the speculation of AI which is currently the biggest driver right now

> The very fact that UTF-8 itself discouraged from using the BOM is just so alien to me.

Adding a BOM makes it incompatible with ASCII, which is one of the benefits of using UTF-8.

Another one who fails to read past my first sentence...

I read past your first sentence, but ASCII is used by non English speaking countries for many things. Source code, for one.

> All you need is a current Chromium based browser mostly.

Google Docs works fine for me in Firefox as well.

I remember one of the Orcs in Warcraft II would yell "Stop poking me!"

I think a lot of people have a fear of AI coding because they're worried that we will move from a world where nobody understands how the whole system works, to a world where nobody knows how any of it works.

This comment on the article sums it up for me, at least in part:

“Nobody knows how the whole system works, but at least everybody should know the part of the system they are contributing to.

Being an engineer I am used to be expert of the very layer of the stack I work on, knowing something of the adjacent layers, mostly ignoring how the rest work.

Now that LLMs write my very code, what is the part that I’m supposed to master? I think the table is still shifting and everybody is failing to grasp where it will stabilize. Analogies with past shifts aren’t helping either.‘

Re-enchantment

A valid concern.

This sounds fantastic for running local "unit"/integration tests.

We do this, can confirm its very nice

This feels like a strawman. Most criticisms of AI for coding are about how overblown the claimed benefits are, not that there are no benefits.

While that may very well be true, it's a valid reply to the GP who made this claim, not to my comment explaining to the parent why their argument was logically flawed.

Just because you disagree with me doesn’t mean my argument is “logically flawed.” And as the other commenter said, I never said AI had no value. I have used various AI tools for probably 4 years now.

If you’re going to talk to and about people in such a condescending way then you at least ask clarifying questions before jumping to the starkest, least charitable interpretation of their point.

Except that the GP didn't claim that AI had no value?

Yeah, it's addictive in a way similar to scrolling social media shorts or playing a slot machine.