Your view is incomplete. It did lowered lifespans, but also increased them MUCH MORE than before. It was not "oh, it got worse, now it is recovering". It was "it got worse, now it is much better than before". The amount of infant deaths it lowered, for example, is massive.

And it is true, those people did not got an iPhone and died, but this is also you saying this for them. You don't know all the specifics of history or all their motivations, the industrial revolution had a bloody story, but it's origins were also organic, it also had aspects of improvement. The world population grew almost 10x.

I don't think we are in a position to judge those past events to the lens you are posing.

If you should never say never, you are already contradicting yourself.

You don't validate an hypothesis without testing counterfactuals, tho.

Did you wrote it from scratch to compare? There's an old motto devs use all the time, you know. Measure first, don't guess. How do you know it would not have took you the same time or less to write the program if it was you? Or if for example, if you were using the AI to write the boilerplate for you while you focused on the core of coding? Or using it as a tab completor assistant instead of it being an agent? Saying it saved you time is easy when you don't have the data to back it up, it's easier than thinking that maybe, maybe this was not that good of an use of your time.

700 lines of code is 2 weeks of work for a good developer? My friend, I wrote 350 lines of executable code (excluding boilerplate) in a morning (4AM to like 9AM, maybe a bit more) to make a test with voxel octrees like yesterday. There's no reason it would take "2 weeks of work for a good developer" to write 700. What takes times in those projects is the research, if you already have this fresh in your head it should not take more than 3 days to make something very simple but reasonable, and a week at max to make something good (not perfect, but good).

> This will only get better with time.

Prove it.

Your estimation maybe right, but maybe also there is a point on why it is right: https://neilmadden.blog/2025/06/06/a-look-at-cloudflares-ai-...

Maybe because (and I'm quoting that article) it is still lacking in what it should have that you managed to accomplish this task in "few days" instead of "a few weeks, maybe months".

Maybe the bottleneck was not your typing speed, but the [specific knowledge] to build that system. Because if you know something well enough, you can build it way faster, like rebuilding something from scratch, you will be faster as you already know the paths. In which case, my question would be: would not be writing this as fast, or maybe at least more secure and reasonable, if you had the complete knowledge of the system first.

Because contrary to LLMs, humans can actually improve and learn when they do things, and they don't whey they don't do things. Not knowing the code to the full extent is worth the time "gained" by using the LLM to write it?

I think it's very hard to estimate those other aspects of the thing.

Novelness is not a characteristic of interpolation, tho, it's about extrapolation. If you have plenty of clients and plenty of related stuff to the provider side, even if on on auth, then it could be considerably trivial for the LLM to interpolate on that field.

You read at the same speed line-by-line your code when you are in your git client?

You are doing something wrong. I go line-by-line through my code like 7x faster than I would do it for someone's else code, because I know what I wrote, my own intentions, my flow of coding and all of those details. I can just look at it en passant, while with AI code I need to carefully review every single detail and the connection between them to approve it.

> It's not just time spent typing. Figuring out what needs to be typed can be both draining and time consuming. It's often (but not always) much easier to review someone else's solution to the problem than it is to solve it from scratch on your own.

This is EXTREMELY false. When you write the code you [remember] it, it's fresh in your head, you [know] what it is doing and exactly what it's supposed to do. This is why debugging a codebase you didn't wrote is harder than one you wrote, if a bug happens you know exactly the spots it could be happening at and you can easily go and check them.