But...

At my job the prevailing sentiment is everything should be easy and fast with AI now so why bother doing anything that can't be done with AI.

Talking with customers can't be done with AI so we'll just ask Claude what our customers think.

Collaborating on a new product design together can't be done with AI so we'll just ask Claude to design it.

Strategy is hard so we'll just chat with Claude about what we should do and accept the output.

And so people generate a bland ticket with Claude and I'm asked to implement completely "souless" feature that is generic and boring and not important to anybody.

Oh and it should only take a few days because code is free now.

We ship it, nobody cares about it because the only thing that's put in any effort is an LLM, and move onto the next thing.

Before LLMs features had humans attached to them and working together to get them out the door meant something. Plus, a lot more effort went into to making sure it was the right feature and a good product because all the people involved wanted their name to be associated with success.

With LLMs nobody cares if the LLM was wrong, its the LLM that was wrong not Jacob or Jamie.

It's like we are producing empty shells of technology. The code is there and the feature is there, but nobody cares. Even the customers don't care because we ship a thing nobody wants and we tell people about it with bland generated marketing and announcement documentation.

And yeah. I'm super productive and shipping more and more and more and more features but I feel like I've done is ship skeletons of web apps when before I used to ship living breathing applications.

What would normally be considered overengineered gold plating is "free" now.

Second, LLM code can be less of a hot mess than human written code if you put in the time to train/prompt/verify/review.

Generating perfect well patterned SOLID and unit tested code with no warnings or anti-patterns has never been easier.

But now since I use Claude at work I switched to keep my home and work stacks similar.

I'm getting used to it but I don't like it.

I'm also much more tired at the end of the day. My mind feels broken. I don't know if our brains were designed for this.

>but not being able to control the exact output worries me

Why?

I'm thinking HVAC or painting lines in parking lots. HVAC because I can program smart systems and parking lot lines because I can use google maps and algos to propose more efficient parking lot designs to existing business owners.

There is that paradox when if something becomes cheaper there is more demand so we'll see what happens.

Finally, I'm a mediocre dev that can only handle 2-3 agents at a time so I probably won't be good enough.

AI produces code that people can understand and is easy to maintain if you ask it for that.

I've been using LLMS for 14+ months now and they've exceeded my expectations.

EMs deal with friction and from my experience more output is more friction.

You have org leaders and businessy people putting their foot on the gas because AI is so productive and then programmers shipping 2-3x more code.

These two forces collide and you're stuck dealing with the friction so 10x the amount of initiatives you did before.

The friction is like sandpaper on sandpaper.