It depends on the way they use it. If you design an architecture and use an LLM to fill it in, I'd consider a more technical label. If you're just using what Claude made, and providing feedback, that's just how software was done 10 years ago except then they'd be talking to a guy instead. And it would be orders of magnitude more expensive.
From my perspective, Claude feels like 5 engineers in a box. you can make things that required small organizations to make.
This is shortsighted (no offense). We should collectively stop personifying AI tools like this before we’ve completely lost our way.
If you’re building and producing valuable software, you are still a creator or software engineer full stop. We can argue over titles, but don’t demote your own creative process to passive consumption.
It depends on the way they use it. If you design an architecture and use an LLM to fill it in, I'd consider a more technical label. If you're just using what Claude made, and providing feedback, that's just how software was done 10 years ago except then they'd be talking to a guy instead. And it would be orders of magnitude more expensive.
From my perspective, Claude feels like 5 engineers in a box. you can make things that required small organizations to make.
If you’re building and producing valuable software, you are still a creator or software engineer full stop. We can argue over titles, but don’t demote your own creative process to passive consumption.