331–340 of 479 posts
Not familiar with this term "cognitive debt" A debt implies repayment. But the loss here is not going to be repaid, it's permanent Perhaps a more appropriate term might be "cognitive deficit" or "cognitive loss"
Where in the heck are the efficiency gains? Couldn't you just drop the LLM part of it and save the company a trillion dollars in tokens?
we need to move on
I already wrote my opinion on this, which I don't think anyone read, but my idea is to let AI code the working system, and then prompt it to teach you, give you challenges, and grade your work. If you write, you should write in your own words, to demonstrate your own understanding - the so-called Feynman technique. Never verbatim. That's as true for coding as it is for study notes.
So we are reduced to code monkeys mindlessly re-typing what an LLM wrote to increase potential understanding... Whatever this approaches, it is not a state of software engineering I find desirable.
Not familiar with this term "cognitive debt" A debt implies repayment. But the loss here is not going to be repaid, it's permanent Perhaps a more appropriate term might be "cognitive deficit" or "cognitive loss"
It’s an extension of technical debt. They’re both bullshit in my opinion.
I no longer do and blogged my updates for fear of being seen as a luddite:
https://kamens.com/blog/code-with-ai-the-hard-way-update https://kamens.com/blog/code-with-ai-the-hard-way-update-ii
Basically it would convert all of the chunks of your code using an LLM to simple pseudocode with clickable symbols so you can follow function calls, definitions, then you could expand/collapse it to see the real underlying code.