> Modern high-end transformers have no problem producing code, while benefiting from a wealth of knowledge that far surpasses any individual.

It will also still happily turn your whole codebase into garbage rather than undo the first thing it tried to try something else. I've yet to see one that can back itself out of a logical corner.

As stated too vague to be interpretable, I agree. The theory isn't novel either, it's well known that easier to use = less engaged, What's less clear but still somewhat well discussed is semi automated = lower quality & more mistakes.

In future I wouldn't mind doing both, since I could be driving and a passenger in multiple contexts with less overhead. Currently attempting to work this way is painful due to the aformentioned switching.

Dopamine makes sense, since its kind of switching between 'sources' of Dopamine, like one is a sugar rush and the other is slow release like reading a book.

At the moment I have a bit of a tick tock where I'll vibe code to a point, get frustrated when it gets stuck on something I can fix myself in a minute or two. Then switch off using AI entirely for a while until I get bored of boilerplate and repeat the cycle.

This resonates, even though copy pasting from Claude et al seems like it should be inefficient somehow it feels less prone to getting completely off track compared to leaving something like cursor or aider chat running.