I mean no offense by this, but intuition literally means acquiring knowledge without an explanation. Did you mean experience or are you telling GP that you cannot explain how you do it?
No that is not what it means. I did not mean experience; I did not mean that I cannot explain how I do it; I meant what I said: intuition. I can explain how I do it; I can even explain how it works (as far as I think), but I don't really know how it works, and I don't care. I just care that I can do it, and that it works.
They mean to distinguish intuition, which draws on experience and can only be reflected on, from experience, which deals in actionable heuristics. Any appeal to intuition you make will fall on experiential advice when pressed. Intuition _works_ here, but if you mean to share your wisdom, you must translate it through experience, which is the actual concept we communicate through.
Essentially yes, thanks. I was focused on the difference between “I used my intuition (which you cannot be taught because I cannot explain it)” and “I can explain how you can develop a skill”.
There's a middle ground here that you're not considering (at least in the small amount of text). Vibe coders will spit out a lot of nonsense because they don't have the skills (or choose not) to tweak the output of their agents. A well seasoned developer using tools like Claude Code on such a codebase can remediate a lot more quickly at this point than someone not using any AI. The current best practices are akin to thinking like a mathematician with regards to calculator use, rather than like a student trying to just pass a class. Working in small chunks and understanding the output at every step is the best approach in some situations.
That's very true. The LLM can be an accelerator for the remediator, too, with the value-add coming from "actually knowing what they're doing", much as before.
Like most of these binary statements, the truth is indeed somewhere in the middle. Software engineers don't require focus on getting beyond acceptable with soft skills. Software engineers who want to move into staff/managements/product/etc. need to focus on them.
Disagree here. That's the stated goal and the point for some folks, but the subset I explained above also exists and their point is to benefit from a false sense of security.
While I know your comment was in sarcastic jest, the question folks are asking this month is "can't we just pay one person to prompt ten models to do that?"
> Having the ways that the topics within a certain book can cross over in lead into another book of a different topic externalized is hollowing and I don’t find it useful.
Intuitively, I agree. This feels like the different between being a creator (of your own thoughts as inspired by another person's) and a consumer (although in a somewhat educational sense). There would need to be a big advantage to being taught those initial thoughts, analogous to why we teach folks algebra/calculus via formulas rather than having every student figure out proofs for themselves.
False dichotomy. Choose moderation if and when you can, like most things in life.
reply