• @[email protected]
    link
    fedilink
    English
    131 month ago

    You, along with most people, are still looking at automation wrong. It’s never been about removing people entirely, even AI, it’s about doing the same work with less cost.

    If you can eliminate one programmers from your four person team by giving the other three AI to produce the same amount of work, congrats you’ve just automated one programming job.

    Programming jobs aren’t going anywhere, but either the amount of code produced is about to skyrocket, or the number of employed programmers is going to drop (or most likely both of those things).

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      51 month ago

      I wonder if this will also have a reverse tail end effect.

      Company uses AI (with devs) to produce a large amount of code -> code is in prod for a few years with incremental changes -> dev roles rotate or get further reduced over time -> company now needs to modernize and change very large legacy codebase that nobody really understands well enough to even feed it Into the AI -> now hiring more devs than before to figure out how to manage a legacy codebase 5-10x the size of what the team could realistically handle.

      Writing greenfield code is relatively easy, maintaining it over years and keeping it up to date and well understood while twisting it for all new requirements - now that’s hard.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 month ago

        AI will help with that too, it’s going to be able to process entire codebases at a time pretty shortly here.

        Given the visual capabilities now emerging, it can likely also do human-equivalent testing.

        One of the biggest AI tricks we haven’t started seeing much of yet in mainstream use is this kind of automated double-checking. Where it generates an answer, and then validates if the answer is valid before actually giving it to a human. Especially in coding bases, there really isn’t anything stopping it from coming up with an answer compiling, running into an error, re-generating, and repeating until the code passes all unit tests or even potentially visual inspection.

        The big limit on this right now is sheer processing cost and context lengths for the models. However, costs for this are dropping faster than any new tech we’ve seen, and it will likely be trivial in just a few years.

    • @Tyrangle
      link
      31 month ago

      Right on. AI feels like a looming paradigm shift in our field that we can either scoff at for its flaws or start learning how to exploit for our benefit. As long as it ends up boosting productivity it’s probably something we’re going to have to learn to work with for job security.

      • @[email protected]
        link
        fedilink
        English
        01 month ago

        It’s already boosting productivity in many roles. That’s just going to accelerate as the models get better, the processing gets cheaper, and (as you said) people learn to use it better.

    • @[email protected]
      link
      fedilink
      1
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      There are some areas I’m hoping get addressed by the coming skyrocket in programmer productivity:

      1. Several phone apps aren’t utter garbage anymore. I’m not holding my breath on this one.
      2. Online grocery websites aren’t shit-full-of-timing errors. If I get this, I’ll also wish for $1 million and buy a lottery ticket.
      3. Municipalities and their allies (townships, city services, various local unions) will have barely passable specialized software support that actually fits their size, location and maybe even culture.

      I think that last one stands to be strongly enabled by AI code assist tools. It might not be the sexiest or highest paying job, but it’ll be work that matters that largely isn’t even being done today.