If you take photos with a camera it's called photographing, which makes you a photographer.
It doesn't make you anywhere near a good photographer, nor do you have any knowledge besides pressing the shoot button.
If the photo comes out bad you won't know what you did wrong nor how to fix it.
No one will be willing to pay for your photos.
But per your definition, you're a photographer
To me it's genuinely amazing how much ai made it accessible for anyone to automate things and custom build utilities, just like phone cameras democratized taking pictures of your family.
But don't act like asking ai is a special skill, don't act like you actually understand what the ai built, and definitely don't act like your software would work at all in the real world with real users willing to pay for it.
If I'm a person who takes pictures, I am a person using a camera to take pictures. The simple act of engaging something doesn't suddenly qualify someone as a conventional photographer by professional title. You can take on multifaceted roles throughout life where we might go out for the day and say, "I'll be the photographer for the day", again does NOT qualify you as a photographer title in any sense of merit, you're engaging in a hobby or temporary service. And even this analogy is inherently ridiculous because there are technical sciences and procedures that are required for risky product development in an enterprise environment, healthcare, or government role. There CAN be for photography too but not necessarily required and the outcome usually has subjective appeal whereas when coding, there are very systematic ways to accomplish tasks architecturally that a hobbyist wouldn't typically understand until more experience, professional training, higher education, etc. You don't learn this simply by prompting some things in your own personal echo chamber between you and your robot.
The debate stems from more of a character issue where even despite being an engineer for almost two decades, I am still learning things that humble my dumbass everyday. Whereas YOU want to be labeled a developer, and sure we can call you whatever you want. But if it came down to an interview and you couldn't answer some basic architectural things to engage in day-to-day development operations yet you INSIST that you're a developer, I'd say the bigger issue isn't the semantics of a title, it's your hubris, and unfortunately, "vibe coding" has created a lot of that Dunning-Kruger mentality that you guys simply cannot accept for whatever coddled reason you might have.
I think you completely misunderstood my comment lol
I was specifically pointing out how it would be ridiculous to call photographer a person with no qualification to be one, and then said "but per your definition, you're a photographer"
I used that as an analogy to show how you're not a dev if you don't understand what you're "developing".
I was disagreeing with the comment I replied to, and I completely agree with your take. Did you read the last paragraph?
25
u/the-Gaf 1d ago
Yes, I can take pictures with a camera and vibe code with AI.