I changed my mind a bit and fine Claude Code quite useful, if you go in small steps and review the coding.
Next level you'll gain is, when you learn reviewing always takes longer than writing.
When I write my posts, the first sketch is written within a few minutes.
But since I respect my readers I want to give them something good to read.
So I review it.
To review it afterwards - correct all typos, misspelled words, wrong words, wrong grammar, throw out redundancy, improve the wording and undestanding, split and shorten sentences, re-formulate the one or the other thing... - takes at least ten times a first sketch needs.
If I do this on something some AI chatbot barfed out, it saves me most of those few minutes to get to the first sketch.
For the price it takes me at least twenty times to review and modify a text not written by me, just to make it something like I might have could said, so dealing with somebody else's thoughts, in this case not even thoughts but some machine's patterns overflowing with redundant babbling, while keeping my own thoughts about what I actually wanted to say in the first place at the same time.
This ain't neither easement, nor improving the fun.
Except you don't give a sh1t on the result's quality and don't care about you readers. But if you don't care about your readers, better don't write at all in the first place. Writing is something you do for others. It's immodesty to throw some bad text at your readers without considering how they gonna take it.
Writing is for reading. Writing just used as for it's written is like a WOM, a Write Only Memory. Pointless.
And with software's source code this is even worse.
You may get something working from it quickly and easily, yes, but... - there is a
large but, and I don't want the 5,371st "AI" thread.
Short: When your quality standards are that low that reviewing takes same or less than producing the first sketch, then some AI chatbot is very useful on producing stuff. That I can grant, sure.
