I wonder if some of the proponents know where the line is in the art. I suspect not.

Overutilization of AI is pulling the ladder up and preventing the next generation of software architects and engineers from learning through experience.

I think the image you post at the beginning basically sums it up for me: ChatGPT o3/5 Thinking can one-shot 75% of most reasonably sized tasks I give it without breaking a sweat, but struggles with tweaks to get it to 100%. So I make those tweaks myself and I have cut my code writing task in half or one third of the time.

ChatGPT also knows more idioms and useful libraries than I do so I generally end up with cleaner code this way.

Ferrari's are still hand assembled but Ford's assembly line and machines help save up human labor even if the quality of a mass-produced item is less than a hand-crafted one. But if everything was hand-crafted, we would have no computers at all to program.

Programming and writing will become niche and humans will still be used where a quality higher than what AI can produce is needed. But most code will be done by minotaur human-ai teams, where the human has a minimal but necessary contribution to keep the AI on track... I mean, it already is.

This would take more time in the short run, but in the long run it would result in more well-rounded humans.

When there are power/internet/LLM outages, some people are going to be rendered completely helpless, and others will be more modestly impacted — but will still be able to get some work done.

We should aim to have more people in the latter camp.