HackerNews中文版

我是[某大公司]的一名资深工程师，AI工具无处不在。虽然没有强制要求使用它们，但它们非常方便，大多数人还是会用。AI存在很多社会层面的担忧，但在个人层面，我开始慢慢觉得自己不如以前熟练了。我当然能做更多的事情，但我理解得更少了。“提示-然后-审查”的编码循环（如Claude Code、Codex、Pi、OpenCode、Amp等）根本不像自己动手编写代码那样鼓励精通。当然，你可以争辩说你在“以更高的抽象层次思考”。但当这种抽象失败时会发生什么？因为抽象往往会失败。这种技能的消退不是一个快速的过程。我不是一夜之间就神奇地失去了编码能力。然而，感觉就像生锈一样。慢慢侵蚀支柱，直到它们垮塌。这个工具（目前）需要熟练的手来正确引导。然而，使用这个工具感觉就像它在削弱熟练的手。这种负反馈循环，我发现无论是在软件行业谋生能力方面，还是在对整个软件质量的影响方面，都确实令人担忧。所以，我想问HN（Hacker News社区）。社区是如何保护自己的技能的？尤其是在积极使用AI的情况下。

查看原文

I'm a senior engineer at [Big Company], and AI tools are ever-present. There's no mandate that you need to use them, but they are so readily available that most people do anyways.There's a lot of society level concerns with AI, but on a personal level, I'm starting to slowly feel less skilled than I used to be. I can certainly do more, but I understand less. The "Prompt-Then-Review" loop of coding harnesses (Claude Code, Codex, Pi, OpenCode, Amp, etc.) just simply do not encourage mastery in the same way as shaping the code yourself. Sure, you can argue you're "thinking at a higher abstraction". But what happens when that abstraction fails? as abstractions often do.It's not a fast process this skill erasure. I'm not magically losing my ability to code overnight. However, it feels like rust. Slowly eroding the pillars until they give.This tool (currently) needs a skilled hand to guide correctly. However using the tool feels like it degrades the skilled hand. This negative feedback loop I find truly concerning from both the ability to make a living in software and the ramifications on software quality writ large.So, I ask HN. How is the community protecting their skills? especially when actively using AI.

HN 提问：在使用 AI 的同时，您是如何保持自身技能的？