{
  "$type": "site.standard.document",
  "bskyPostRef": {
    "cid": "bafyreig4owdohxffkrfhy6y7pbzkdihf4hsflvzjjze4wf73euzl56aoau",
    "uri": "at://did:plc:pi6woz4d47bkuws673w2il2r/app.bsky.feed.post/3ml7zwy2xxp32"
  },
  "path": "/t/anti-llm-sentiment-considered-harmful/14008?page=4#post_74",
  "publishedAt": "2026-05-06T23:38:25.000Z",
  "site": "https://discourse.haskell.org",
  "tags": [
    "hickey/lowy"
  ],
  "textContent": "hasufell:\n\n> I’ve head that theory recently, that the most avid LLM adopters are maybe those that in fact don’t care about coding on its own, but more as a means to an end. I have no idea how accurate that theory is, so I’m curious to hear your thoughts. I’ve also heard about people who claim it actually reinvigorated their excitement for coding (I’m guessing because they can potentially delegate all the stuff they don’t find interesting to the agents).\n\nYour theory is partly right and partly wrong, I think. There’s a difference between the scaffolding part of coding and the architecture/ simplicity part. LLMs handle the first competently and the second poorly. Delegating the first has freed up more of my attention for the second. So it’s not “I don’t care about coding as craft” so much as “the craft I care about is architectural or higher-level, and LLMs let me do more of it per unit time.”\n\nThat said, you’re pointing at something real. There are users who don’t particularly enjoy coding and just want output, and there’s no care for code quality. I try to guard against the latter with explicit review (hickey/lowy and /code-police in srid/agency) … if the generated code doesn’t pass that bar, including my own manual review, it doesn’t get merged (I discard a lot of PRs, actually). I still enjoy the process as much as I did in the “pre-LLM” days.",
  "title": "Anti-LLM Sentiment Considered Harmful"
}