There are some potential biases here.

Of course it is unimpressive when someone does something familiar to you, that is subjective. That same thing could be framed as impressive, to someone else, such as the person who is now able to do the unfamiliar as if it is familiar.

The other bias would be to assume that there aren’t unfamiliar things (you don’t know every tool every made, therefore you may potentially benefit from using AI to help with learning new tools).

Another bias is to assume AI is only good for learning something unfamiliar. There are ways to contain generative coding that scale, in some contexts.

Every day Teams gives me the choice to 'add Copilot panel', and the alternative is only 'Maybe later'. No simple "No".

Today I was using $tool with some dense docs and average forums. In a moment of weakness, I asked an LLM. It said, "just use strpos! :magic_wand:". Of course, strpos didn't exist, but it was in the question for the top result on Google for my problem: "I want to do x with $tool, kind of like strpos in $other_tool". After the impressiveness of the language generation wears off, it's just another bullshit generator and man I've had enough of bullshit these days.

AI bubble wrap or AI insulating foam?

VR actually helps me get more exercise (Beat Saber), so I'd definitely call it more impressive :P