zlacker

in that one year, more was accomplished than writing a body of code.

people learned, explored concepts, and discovered lateral associations, developed collective actions, consolidated future solidarity.

claude just output some code.

>>rolph+(OP)
Also a lot if politics and decision reversals def happened.

>>rolph+(OP)
Exactly. It's a lot easier to prompt an LLM when you spent a year understanding the problem.

>>rolph+(OP)
Yes. Obviously no one is claiming that Claude Code literally made a year pass in an hour as if it were Superman spinning the Earth faster. Can we just keep the goalpost put for a second?

P.S. EDIT:

The big question will soon become - how technical do you need to be to build a system, because most of those learnings, concepts and associations are surely at the domain level. Or phrased differently: to what extent will future software development shift from hands-on engineering to hands-off technical guidance? Perhaps the future developer role would be much more similar to today's TPM (Technical Program Manager)?

>>rolph+(OP)
I routinely spend more time tweaking a prompt than Claude Code spends creating something. The better the prompt, the faster it seems to work (with better results). So I can totally relate to your comment.

It's awesome to be amazed by some cool new technology but let's not be naive.

>>rolph+(OP)
i don't know if its just a bubble i'm in, but it seems like most of my day as an engineer is meetings/endless scrum events and tracking problems yet we sound more energy on automating code with llms than on automating all that other overhead...

i wonder, is coding really the bottleneck in most cases?

>>rolph+(OP)
Just?