A chess engine is not the non-master's friend, says IM Jeremy Silman. (HT: Ross Hytnen) He moderates that conclusion slightly by the end of the article, but his general point that most players would be far better served trying to understand things themselves, in human categories, and would benefit from human teaching seems right to me - at least or especially for those who are interested in improving.
I'm inclined to agree with the drawbacks he notes of using an engine - especially (but not only!) for non-masters, but suspect he's neglecting some positive ways of using engines. What are your thoughts, readers, especially on this last point?