> I’m self taught and don’t code that much but I feel like I benefit a ton from LLMs giving me specific answers to questions that would take me a lot of time to figure out with documentation and stack overflow

Same here. Combing discussion forums and KB pages for an hour or two, seeking how to solve a certain problem with a specific tool has been replaced by a 50-100 word prompt in Gemini which gives very helpful replies, likely derived from many of those same forums and support docs.

Of course I am concerned about accuracy, but for most low-level problems it's easy enough to test. And you know what, many of those forum posts or obsolete KB articles had their own flaws, too.

I really value forums and worry about the impact LLMs are having on them.

Stackoverflow has its flaws for sure, but I've learned a hell of a lot watching smart people argue it out in a thread.

Actual learning: the pros and cons of different approaches. Even the downvoted answers tell you something often.

Asking an LLM gets you a single response from a median stackoverflow commenter. Sure, they're infinitely patient and responsive, but can never beat a few grizzled smart arses trying to one-up each other.

I think you can learn a lot from debugging, and all the code I've put into prod from LLM has needed debugging (rather more than it should from the LOC count).

I agree and that’s definitely part of my current learning process. But I think someone dependent on a LLM from day one might struggle to debug their LLM generated code. Probably just feed it back to the LLM and their mileage is definitely going to vary with that approach.

Maybe, but if I recall (from long long ago) in learning how to program, the process of debugging ones code was almost more enlightening than writing it initially - so many loops of not understanding the implications of the code and then smacking my forehead - and remembering it for ever. Like being able to type code but not debug is pretty worthless.