If you're letting LLMs do more than assisting, don't. That's my advice. But if like you're title they're just assisting you, then what skills are atrophying? You still review the code and understand it right? You still second guess the LLMs proposed solutions and look for better approaches right?
Articulating how LLM assistance is different than junior programmers writing code and assisting would be useful, everyone has different setups and workflows, so it's hard to say in my opinion.
1. Ask AI to come up with the different options and let you review it
2. You think about the options and ask AI for feedback
#1 is much faster but results in atrophy (you are not critically coming up with the architecture changes)
#2 uses your and AI skills but it's gonna be slower.
which one will you choose? currently i'm doing #1
Well for once, tech companies are still at large hiring via leetcode/livecoding interviews. I feel much less prepared now that I was a year ago.
You're losing if you're handing your brain over to LLMs right now, because companies would prefer to hire someone with more up-to-date coding skills, even if they then force them to use LLMs. So the winning move is to resist using LLMs for as long as possible.
Stop fanboying the industry's attempted commodification of your work, and get back to the basics.
If you don’t have ideas, spent more time away from the screen, they will come.
Love that, and you stated a fact. Or, rethink other products!
What change are you after?
Ask HN 1920: How to avoid losing farrier skills in new automobile era?
Ask HN 1980: How to avoid losing typewriting and shorthand skills in new microcomputer era?
Ask HN 1990: How to avoid losing assembly language skills in new C++ era?
Ask HN 1995: How to avoid losing DOS TUI app dev skills in new Windows era?
Ask HN 2000: How to avoid losing Visual Basic skills in new web application era?
(The answer, btw, is if you are still interested in such niche skills, then you just have to practice on your own, or find a niche product or marketplace).