|
| ▲ | xandrius 7 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| You cutoff a generation of juniors from employment and learning , the seniors are gone and it's all harnesses and AI systems. I'm not all gloom and doom but the treatment of junior engineers is something I think we will either regret or rejoice. Either will have a spur of creative people doing their own independent thing or we'll have lost a generation of great engineers. |
| |
| ▲ | orangecoffee 5 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | This is not happening at least for 25 years, is what seniors I trust tell me. | | |
| ▲ | GrinningFool 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | I'd say closer to 10-15 but... I'm not sure the point you're making. Is it okay because it's 25 years in the future? | | |
| ▲ | lionkor 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | If we try hard enough, we can destroy the planet before we get there, I guess? 25 years is not a long time. |
|
| |
| ▲ | est 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Today junior assembly language programmer are all gone, too. | | |
| ▲ | fxtentacle 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Yes and that’s why I can charge premium rates for debugging. Most people cannot read a stack trace anymore. | |
| ▲ | MagicMoonlight 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | And that’s going to cause serious issues when people like Linus die and nobody knows how to make operating systems anymore. We’ve been coasting along on a single generation who have ruled with iron fists. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | codebje 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Brain drain. If you fire all your SWEs they won't sit around twiddling their thumbs waiting for an AI collapse, they'll career shift. Maybe to an unemployment line and/or homelessness, maybe to something else productive, but either way they'll lose SWE skills. If you close down all the SWE junior positions you'll strongly discourage young people training in the field. They'll do something else. Then if you want to go back, who will you hire for it? |
| |
| ▲ | svantana 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Why would anyone want to go back? It seems likely that the automated dev systems will just keep improving and get faster, cheaper, stronger. | | |
| ▲ | lionkor 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > automated dev systems They are large language models. Not automated development machines. They hallucinate. The goal post has not shifted since 2023 or so. Make an LLM that doesn't blatantly disregard knowledge it has, instructions it has been giving, over and over, and you win. If trillions of USD of investment can't do it, I'd be curious to see what can. | | |
| ▲ | svantana 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | There are definitely automated dev systems, of which an LLM is a part. The remaining part may be called a 'harness' or whatever. The quality of the generated software is another matter. If the AI is not good enough, then don't fire the devs. If/when the devs are no longer needed, I don't see why the need would return later, that was my point. | | |
| ▲ | HarHarVeryFunny 44 minutes ago | parent [-] | | A harness like Claude Code does not turn an LLM into a software developer. If that was the case companies could just have their project managers managing Claude Code instead of developers, and they would immediately realize that using Claude Code to develop software is just as complex and geeky as it ever was - nothing changed in that regard. A harness and a bunch of skills is just the new "think step by step" prompting technique. Don't just let the LLM rip and write a bunch of code, but try to get it to think before coding, avoid things like churning the code base for no reason, and generally try to prompt it to behave more like a developer not an LLM. Except it still is an LLM. A coding agent is really not much different to a chat "agent" in this regard. You've got the base LLM then a system prompt trying to steer it to behave in a certain way, always suggest "next step", keep to a consistent persona, etc. None of this actually makes the LLM any smarter or turns it into a brilliant conversationalist, anymore than the coding agent giving the LLM a system prompt magically turns it into a software developer. |
|
|
| |
| ▲ | nubg 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | I agree with you, but it's a case of the tradegy of the commons. One single company cannot make a meaningful dent even with your insight. |
|
|
| ▲ | pjc50 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The problem of "instant legacy" systems: something that's vibe coded and reached unmaintainable by either the AI or humans, but is also now indispensable because users are relying on it. |
| |
| ▲ | tdeck 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | I'm curious if this will cause a drop in quality that will lead users to generally lose trust in software. | | |
| ▲ | pjc50 6 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Some of that is already there .. but the users generally have nowhere else to go and ineffective pushback. "Enterprise software" has been awful for decades, things like Lotus Notes and SAP. Everyone hates Windows; everyone continues to use Windows. | |
| ▲ | HarHarVeryFunny an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There will always be competition. For every company negatively impacting customer experience and their own ability to compete, there will be others happy to step in and take advantage of that. | |
| ▲ | GrinningFool 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Users don't currently trust software. Look at what we've done to them - can you blame them? The consumer space is about extracting every ounce of personal data possible. The b2b space is about "maximizing customer value" - that is, not maximizing the value of your product to the customer, but maximizing the value of the customer to your business. Lock them in and lock them down, make your product "sticky" so they can't leave without immense cost. | |
| ▲ | eloisius 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | See Windows 11 |
| |
| ▲ | varjag 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Hey you can just rewrite (or should we say regenerate) it. Second system has never been cheaper! |
|
|
| ▲ | ehnto 6 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Lack of developers, if juniors don't get hired they will move onto other industries. Company brain drain, knowledge leaves with your seniors if you decide to get rid of them, or they just leave due to the conditions AI creates. I don't know if the above comes to fruition, there's a lot of questions that only time will answer. But those are my first thoughts. |
|
| ▲ | amelius 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Time. In a few years there might be no old-school way to develop anymore. Everything will be built around AI. |
| |
| ▲ | lionkor 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | And blockchain, don't forget blockchain. | |
| ▲ | amelius 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Even the programming languages will be made for AI. | |
| ▲ | pautasso 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | All code that could be written by humans, has been written. Henceforth, the rest will be generated. |
|