“There are a 16,000 new lives being born every hour. They're all starting with a fairly blank slate. Are you genuinely saying that they'll all be left behind because they didn't learn your technology in utero?”

This is a great framing.

▲

furryrain 3 days ago | parent | next [-]

I'm less convinced.

To keep and/or increase my current compensation, I have to be competitive in the software development market.

(Whether I need AI to remain competitive is another matter.)

The 16,000 new babies will be competing in different markets.

Oh, and of those 16,000 babies, many are born in far less fortunate circumstances, they're already far behind their cohort. :/

	▲	JumpCrisscross 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> keep and/or increase my current compensation, I have to be competitive in the software development market Author’s point is that competitiveness can come in many forms. Having the same AI proficiency as everyone else isn’t differentiating. (And it isn’t table stakes.)

▲

themacguffinman 3 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Isn't that what is implied by the toughest job market yet for junior level candidates? Author is very confident that the answer to his question is "no".

	▲	mablopoule 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		I think the implication is that even though the technological landscape is evolving, it's not as if people born in the 60's couldn't foray into computer science because they arrived too late to study the ENIAC first.

▲

6thbit 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

Not really, cause they will have lots of years to catch up to Only whatever is in vogue at the moment while adopting what surrounds them growing up. They won't have to unlearn and let go of their own pride or sunk cost into specializing on the wrong thing.

I think the framing just doesn't help at all.