What’s in this article is true, but to be honest I’ve never seen anyone using lines of code as an optimization metric. Even among the most AI enthusiastic people. I mean: the author of the article seem to be fighting non-existing problem.

This is why my personal use of AI has been focused pretty cleanly on “doing what I already do, more thoroughly” - By not turning it into a “ship more code more faster” machine, it’s a “can explore my code and answer questions and help design things more thoroughly” machine.

I tend to go with “AI-augmented” development because I’m shipping the same things I’ve been shipping - Just with a way to quickly brainstorm and compare ideas on something my team members may not have time for. I can propose my ideas and have some LLM tell me what the downsides of my approach would be - or what I should guard against.

It’s crazy to me that folks are treating them like sources of truth when they should just be an untrustworthy second opinion that is faster than you. I think of it as an intern with speed but questionable taste lol.

My problem is that as I grow older and older, I find it harder and harder to be arsed to write any code. LLM fixes that problem beautifully. I have 20+ years experience so it kinda works. If you don’t have it might not, at the current moment.