AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it • Hacker News Board

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#31

Post by jnpnj » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

saadn92 wrote: post #10

Hard disagree. I feel like I'm thinking a lot more now because I have so many parallel projects going on at the same time. AI has allowed me to really, truly create in a way that I've never done before. Yes, my coding skills probably aren't as sharp as they used to be, but my system design skills are at an all time high. Don't blame the tool.

But is the debate about "fleshing out a system spec" or "ability to come up, plan and explore various ideas to solve problems elegantly on a budget" ? I think there's always these two sides conflated as one when discussing LLM impact on users.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#32

Post by puapuapuq » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

awepofiwaop wrote: post #19

zulux wrote: post #11

Yes.... and I can't think without compiled languages. Missed out on assembler. Becoming dependent on a technology is to be expected. I'm pretty sure 95% of us are dependent on packaged meat and don't know how to hunt.

I'm seeing plenty of internal work where I ask someone about their code, they ask Claude, and reply with "Claude says...". That's substantively different than going from assembly to C.

I am that someone thinking why you can't ask Claude yourself.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#33

Post by johndough » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

ironman1478 wrote: post #8

joe_mamba wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How do you graduate your engineering degree without being able to think? Even my colleagues who cheated their way through uni still needed critical thinking to do that and get away with cheating without being caught. People might hate this but being a good cheat requires a lot of critical thinking.

You don't need a 4.0 to graduate. And even if you got one, a lot of grades are composed of tests, not projects. You can just memorize your way through things if you were dedicated enough. It's not really that hard to get a degree in engineering if your only goal is the degree itself.

> a lot of grades are composed of tests, not projects

(Take home) projects are easier than ever thanks to AI. In the past, you at least had to track down some person to do the work for you.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#34

Post by relativeadv » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

saadn92 wrote: post #10

Hard disagree. I feel like I'm thinking a lot more now because I have so many parallel projects going on at the same time. AI has allowed me to really, truly create in a way that I've never done before. Yes, my coding skills probably aren't as sharp as they used to be, but my system design skills are at an all time high. Don't blame the tool.

I work with others who have made this same claim. For those people, when I observed their work during demo days the unmentioned thing is that they were going to the AI for system design questions as well. This was framed as "just using it as a sounding board" but what was actually done was not merely a sounding board but instead was asking for solutions. Anchoring bias being what it is, these felt like good ideas and they kept them.

Its the feeling of having done a lot of thinking for themselves without having actually done so.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#35

Post by idle_zealot » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

saadn92 wrote: post #10

Hard disagree. I feel like I'm thinking a lot more now because I have so many parallel projects going on at the same time. AI has allowed me to really, truly create in a way that I've never done before. Yes, my coding skills probably aren't as sharp as they used to be, but my system design skills are at an all time high. Don't blame the tool.

If 1% of people using the tool end up like you, and 99% end up drooling invalids, I think it would be insane to not blame the tool. If a tool that's incompatible with humans isn't to blame for that incompatibility, what is to blame for the harm done? Human nature? The point of a tool is to be used by humans.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#36

Post by lispisok » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

joe_mamba wrote: post #5

CorbenDallas wrote: post #3

There are plenty of engineers, who simply can't think, AI will not change anything in this regard.

How do you graduate your engineering degree without being able to think? Even my colleagues who cheated their way through uni still needed critical thinking to do that and get away with cheating without being caught. People might hate this but being a good cheat requires a lot of critical thinking.

Grade inflation and schools passing kids who should fail to game metrics and keep collecting student loans is a problem. I wouldnt consider hiring anybody from my alma mater who didnt score a sandard deviation or higher on the tests.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#37

Post by hun3 » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

andsoitis wrote: post #21

orblivion wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compilers are a layer of abstraction that we can ask another human about. Some human is there taking care of it. Until we get to the point where we trust AI with our survival it would be good to be able to audit the entire stack.

any human can read the code an AI produces.

How can you read a language you didn't learn?

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#38

Post by kirth_gersen » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:24 PM UTC

andsoitis wrote: post #21

orblivion wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compilers are a layer of abstraction that we can ask another human about. Some human is there taking care of it. Until we get to the point where we trust AI with our survival it would be good to be able to audit the entire stack.

any human can read the code an AI produces.

for now. some people seem to think we should make ai native programming languages and just let them be black boxes. which is a bad idea imo

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#39

Post by klodolph » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:25 PM UTC

enraged_camel wrote: post #26

klodolph wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What part do you disagree with? It sounds like you don’t disagree with either the title of the article or its contents. > In talking to engineering management across tech industry heavy-weights, it's apparent that software engineering is starting to split people into two nebulous groups: > The first group will use A.I. to remove drudgery, move faster, and spend more time on the parts of the job that actually matter i…

The HN title is heavily editorialized. Actual article title is far less controversial: "A.I. Should Elevate Your Thinking, Not Replace It"

Ah, I was thinking of the editorialized HN title.

Re: AI should elevate your thinking, not replace it

#40

Post by dawnerd » Sun, Apr 26, 2026, 8:25 PM UTC

andsoitis wrote: post #21

orblivion wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Compilers are a layer of abstraction that we can ask another human about. Some human is there taking care of it. Until we get to the point where we trust AI with our survival it would be good to be able to audit the entire stack.

any human can read the code an AI produces.

Have you tried to shift through a whole lot of vibe coded slop? It’s really mentally draining to see all of the really bad techniques they fall back on just to brute force a solution.