I want to compliment Anthropic for doing this research and publishing it.

One of my advantages(?) when it comes to using AI is that I've been the "debugger of last resort" for other people's code for over 20 years now. I've found and fixed compiler code generation bugs that were breaking application code. I'm used to working in teams and to delegating lots of code creation to teammates.

And frankly, I've reached a point where I don't want to be an expert in the JavaScript ORM of the month. It will fall out of fashion in 2 years anyway. And if it suddenly breaks in old code, I'll learn what I need to fix it. In the meantime, I need to know enough to code review it, and to thoroughly understand any potential security issues. That's it. Similarly, I just had Claude convert a bunch of Rust projects from anyhow to miette, and I definitely couldn't pass a quiz on miette. I'm OK with this.

I still develop deep expertise in brand new stuff, but I do so strategically. Does it offer a lot of leverage? Will people still be using it on greenfield projects next year? Then I'm going to learn it.

So at the current state of tech, Claude basically allows me to spend my learning strategically. I know the basics cold, and I learn the new stuff that matters.