When I started programming, my whole day revolved around development. I’d wake up, write code, and go to sleep. And that’s how it was day in and day out. My entire social circle consisted of people who also wrote code. I studied frameworks, libraries, and various programming languages.
I guess the main thing I want to get across though is, there’s more here than just these two types of motivations, the instrumental business coder and the beauty driven purist, and this isn’t just about AI, there are so many potentially ugly tools and practices out there that are widely used anyway. Personally as a hobbyist who doesn’t program for money anymore, I’m going to do things the way I want to do them and the main thing I normally want to do is get something working quickly that I can see how the top level concept works in reality before I get lost in the weeds and lose interest. I have (often strong) feelings about the code itself, and really appreciate seeing something done the way I feel it should be, but these are situational. And they are tied to how the code itself serves its purpose. For instance a case where the user cannot or should not have to trust the developer, and so the overwhelming focus of the design is accessible verification of the application’s security properties, that’s awesome to me. So when the author of the blog post says this:
I think they are missing some stuff. This can’t be reduced to just being about isolated enjoyment of the process. We have a relationship to the software we write and use, and the nature of that relationship matters and has consequences. And caring about that isn’t synonymous with use or rejection of any particular tool.