Of course it matters. If you used Claude just to accelerate production, let's say it makes you twice as productive. That means if you budget 30 minutes to do something, if Claude stops working, it means it'll take you 60. Or you just use the 30 and its half as good, not as polished, any number of things. Particularly if you know claude is really good at repetitive tasks, such as making sure all the font are the same size so you leave that until the end so you can focus on content.

The example are contrived, but still very real.

Yes it matters regardless of how much thinking you offloaded. Having the tools you’re using vanish would stop anyone. Imagine if your favorite editor or other tools vaporized and you had 30 minutes left.

If the OP had hours they’d probably be fine.

My different smug answer is: I bought a laptop with 64G of RAM before the RAM bubble and would try throwing qwen3 or gemma at it.

If you completely stop being able to work with without Claude, then I say a deep analysis of the root cause is needed and it may have some uncomfortable findings.

But for many, they use it as a productivity multiplier. They can still get the job done, just slower. The problem is that the rest of the supply chain likely doesn't care, management deadlines likely don't have 'do without AI' timelines any longer, so if we define the "job" as needing to meet the deadlines and not just complete the task eventually, people will find themselves unable to do their "job" without AI.

These both can be simplified as "not being able to do your job without AI", but I propose we have little to gain and a decent bit to lose by doing anything that treats these two situations as the same.

Why stop at Claude? Forget computers, bring the good ol' slider projection machine thingie and do super old school.

Even better, if cave painting was good enough thousands of years ago it is good enough today.

Linus Torvalds might be able to describe some obscure part of Linux Kernel memory management that LLMs might not be able to come up with, but he won't be able to type it out faster than he can have it generated off his explanation

are your audiences going to be exactly as pleased with just the prompt in the center of the sole slide just as they would with the complete generated slides? probably not

will they find AI-generated slides sloppy and worthless anyway? I might, but that is not exactly my business. also I know gcc or clang won't accept a prompt as source file(s) yet

Only Claude understands their codebases... so they probably are not thinking anymore.

Asinine argument. Are you outsourcing your thinking to the compiler because it gives you warnings, instead of getting an error two hours into your punch card programs's runtime?

People have done this work by hand for years and years, and now when they've been using LLMs to do it 5x faster for a couple of years, suddenly they'd be unable to work the traditional way? Please

> My car broke down and now I'm late for work

> Well you shouldn't have outsourced your mobility to a machine

[flagged]