Raw LLM Responses

@rosevee35 'Ones used to program a machine' is like saying 'art is just rubbing stuff onto a canvas'. It's a *vast* oversimplification of what is actually being done. Programming is tying logic together in ways that it has never been tied together before. It's *objectively* unique work done by human minds. The fact that nothing can program nearly as well as an experienced human programmer - not even AI - proves this. Art is a way of representing reality, ideas, and information in a new form. That's also what programming is. Sure, programming is sometimes as simple as telling a machine to turn on a light, but art is sometimes as simple as drawing a stick figure. Neither are very good examples of what their respective domains *actually* entail, and the human element required. 'Elegance' is an extremely desirable quality in code. Elegance is not about simply programming a machine, it's about having a certain beauty, a certain human element, a certain style, it's about a certain uniqueness that people want to preserve. You can't be expected to understand - any more than a Māori from the bush could be expected to understand a Jackson Pollock painting - as code doesn't surround us like art does, and it doesn't connect with people in the same way, but to dismiss it as nonexistent is exactly the kind of ignorance that the *actual* tech bros use to justify their exploitation. P.S. you're using the word 'tech bro' wrong. It's a specific stereotype that *very* rarely correlates with ideas such as 'LLMs are trained on stolen code'. Calling anyone who understands programmer a 'tech bro' undermines your own argument - it demonstrates a distinct lack of understanding of the mere culture behind the field, let alone the details of the field itself.