Ask HN: SWEs how do you future-proof your career in light of LLMs?

Post by palata » Tue, Dec 17, 2024, 9:12 PM UTC

brink wrote: post #910

palata wrote: post #796

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It's laughable only if you think that the only reasonable metric is "consistent and reliable". The parent says "it typically doesn't matter that the product is worse if it's cheap enough". And that seems valid to me: the average quality of software today seems to be worse than 10 years ago. We do worse but cheaper.

> And that seems valid to me: the average quality of software today seems to be worse than 10 years ago. You don't remember Windows Vista? Windows ME? I think you have that view because of survivor's bias. Only the good old software is still around today. There was plenty of garbage that barely worked being shipped 10 years ago.

Post by dogman144 » Tue, Dec 17, 2024, 9:31 PM UTC

dweinus wrote: post #517

jvanderbot wrote: post #398

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They most insightful thing here would have been to learn how those traders survived, adapted, or moved on. It's possible everyone just stops hiring new folks and lets the incumbents automate it. Or it's possible they all washed cars the rest of their careers.

I knew a bunch of them. Most of them moved on: retired or started over in new careers. It hit them hard. Maybe not so hard because trading was a lucrative career, but most of us don't have that kind of dough to fall back on.

Post by dogman144 » Tue, Dec 17, 2024, 9:45 PM UTC

aprilthird2021 wrote: post #528

dogman144 wrote: post #378

The last fairly technical career to get surprisingly and fully automated in the way this post displays concern about - trading. I spent a lot of time with traders in early '00's and then '10's when the automation was going full tilt. Common feedback I heard from these highly paid, highly technical, highly professional traders in a niche indusry running the world in its way was: - How complex the job was - How high a…

Okay, but one thing you kinda miss is that trading (e.g. investing) is still one of the largest ways for people to make money. Even passively investing in ETFs is extremely lucrative. If LLMs become so good that everyone can just let an LLM go into the world and make them money, the way we do with our investments, won't that be good?

Post by phist_mcgee » Tue, Dec 17, 2024, 9:59 PM UTC

mplanchard wrote: post #515

epolanski wrote: post #442

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Comments like these make me wonder whether we live in the same worlds. I'm a cursor user e.g. and Tab completion is by far the most powerful auto complete I've ever used. There's scenarios where you can do some major refactors by simply asking (extract this table to its own component while using best react practices to avoid double renders) and it does so istantly. Refactor the tests for it? Again. Semi instant. Mean…

Sounds like you’re working in react. The models are orders of magnitude worse at less common frameworks and/or languages. React is so boilerplate-heavy that it’s almost a perfect match for LLMs. That said, every large react codebase I’ve worked in inevitably became really complex and had a ton of little quirks and tweaks to deal with unexpected re-renders and such. I avoid the FE when I can these days, but I’d be fai…

Post by phist_mcgee » Tue, Dec 17, 2024, 10:08 PM UTC

whtsthmttrmn wrote: post #907

dyauspitr wrote: post #861

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is denial. LLMs already write code at a senior level. Couple that with solid tests and a human code reviewer and we’re already at 5x the story points per sprint at the startup I work at.

I'm sure that startup is a great indication of things to come. Bound for long term growth.