> This summer, we assigned the problem to an intern (that’s less tenure than a junior engineer). The intern led the development of this feature. They talked to the product manager to understand the problem and requirements. They wrote the design document on how to approach it, aligned with the team, and built it. Of course they did that with the help of AI, and the team they were working with.

So, interns can still produce some value. How much value?

> In our product, there was a feature which had been requested for years, but had not been built yet. It wasn’t overly complex, but it was not critical.

Said another way: The feature was of so little value that it was not even worth assigning to a non-AI-assisted intern! This is what most of us mean when we say “AI lowers the value of…”

▲

franciscomt 3 days ago | parent [-]

Thanks. How do you think that lowers the value of an intern, can you explain it?

You're right that pre-AI that feature would not have been given to an intern (because they wouldn't be able to own it). So pre-AI, customers had a problem, we paid the intern, but could not solve the problem. Post-AI, the same problem exist, we pay the same intern. The customer problem is solved.

	▲	jt2190 3 days ago \| parent [-]
		> . How do you think that lowers the value of an intern The article shows that the market value of the intern is lower: Work was not prioritized and given to a higher-cost junior engineer. > … pre-AI that feature would not have been given to an intern (because they wouldn't be able to own it)… Meaning, a more-skilled, higher-cost employee would have to do some or all of the work. Edit: Another meaning of “worth” is a “intrinsic value”. Humans have worth in this sense.