It has its uses, but often fail at seemingly simple things.
The other day,i couldn't get Claude to generate an HTML page, with a logo on the top left, no matter how I prompted.
Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
201–210 of 886 posts
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#202Earlier quoted context omitted.
Part of the problem is that many working developers are still in companies that don't allow experimentation with the bleeding edge of AI on their code base, so their experiences come from headlines and from playing around on personal projects. And on the first 10,000 lines of code, the best in class tools are actually pretty good. Since they can help define the structure of the code, it ends up shaped in a way that w…
Some codebases grown with AI assistance must be getting pretty large now, I think an interesting metric to track would be percent of code that is AI generated over time. Still isn't a perfect proxy for how much work the AI is replacing though, because of course it isn't the case that all lines of code would take the same amount of time to write by hand.
Yeah, that would be very helpful to track. Anecdotally, I have found in my own projects that the larger they get the less I can lean on agent/chat models to generate new code that works (without needing enough tweaks that I may as well have just written it myself). Having been written with models does seem to help, but it doesn't get over the problem that eventually you run out of useful context window.
What I have seen is that autocomplete scales fine (and Cursor's autocomplete is amazing), but autocomplete supplements a software engineer, it doesn't replace them. So right now I can see a world where one engineer can do a lot more than before, but it's not clear that that will actually reduce engineering jobs in the long term as opposed to just creating a teller effect.
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#203What evidence do we have that AI is actually replacing programmers already? The article treats messaging on this as a forgone conclusion, but I strongly suspect it's all hype-cycle BS to cover layoffs, or a misreading of "Meta pivots to AI" headlines.
It'll happen gradually over time, with more pressure on programmers to "get more done".
I think it's useful to look at what has already happened at another, much smaller profession -- translators -- as a precursor to what will happen with programmers.
1. translation software does a mediocre job, barely useful as a tool; all jobs are safe
2. translation software does a decent job, now expected to be used as time-saving aid, expectations for translators increase, fewer translators needed/employed
3. translation software does a good job, translators now hired to proofread/check the software output rather than translate themselves, allowing them to do 3x to 4x as fast as before, requiring proportionally fewer translators
4. translation software, now driven by LLMs, does an excellent job, only cursory checks required; very few translators required mostly in specialized cases
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#204What evidence do we have that AI is actually replacing programmers already? The article treats messaging on this as a forgone conclusion, but I strongly suspect it's all hype-cycle BS to cover layoffs, or a misreading of "Meta pivots to AI" headlines.
Feels like C-suite thinks if they keep saying it, it will happen. Maybe! I think more likely programmers are experiencing a power spike.
I think it's a great time to be small, if you can reap the benefits of these tools to deliver EVEN FASTER than large enterprise than you already are. Aider and a couple Mac minis and you can have a good time!
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#205What evidence do we have that AI is actually replacing programmers already? The article treats messaging on this as a forgone conclusion, but I strongly suspect it's all hype-cycle BS to cover layoffs, or a misreading of "Meta pivots to AI" headlines.
Zuckerberg said it. https://www.inc.com/kit-eaton/mark-zuckerberg-plans-to-repla...
In the ~8 years since I worked there, Zuckerberg announced that we'd all be spending our 8 hour workdays in the Metaverse, and when that didn't work out, he pivoted to crypto currency.
He's just trend-chasing, like all the other executives who are afraid of being left behind as their flagship product bleeds users...
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#206There's such a huge disconnect between people reading headlines and developers who are actually trying to use AI day to day in good faith. We know what it is good at and what it's not. It's incredibly far away from doing any significant change in a mature codebase. In fact I've become so bearish on the technology trying to use it for this, I'm thinking there's going to have to be some other breakthrough or something…
Part of the problem is that many working developers are still in companies that don't allow experimentation with the bleeding edge of AI on their code base, so their experiences come from headlines and from playing around on personal projects. And on the first 10,000 lines of code, the best in class tools are actually pretty good. Since they can help define the structure of the code, it ends up shaped in a way that w…
My company allowed us to use it but most developers around me didn't reach out to the correct people to be able to use it.
Yes I find it incredibly helpful and try to tell them.
But it's only helpful in small contexts, auto completing things, small snippets, generating small functions.
Any large scale changes like most of these AI companies try to push them being capable of doing it just falls straight on its face. I've tried many times, and with every new model. It can't do it well enough to trust in any codebase that's bigger than a few 10000 lines of code.
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#207There's such a huge disconnect between people reading headlines and developers who are actually trying to use AI day to day in good faith. We know what it is good at and what it's not. It's incredibly far away from doing any significant change in a mature codebase. In fact I've become so bearish on the technology trying to use it for this, I'm thinking there's going to have to be some other breakthrough or something…
> Now completing small chunks of mundane code, explaining code, doing very small mundane changes. Very good at.
This is the only current threat. The time you save as a developer using AI on mundane stuff will get filled by something else, possibly more mundane stuff.
A small company with only 2-5 Seniors may not be able to drop anyone. A company with 100 seniors might be able to drop 5-10 of them total, spread across each team.
The first cuts will come at scaled companies. However, it's difficult to detect if companies are cutting people just to save money or if they are actually realizing any productivity gains from AI at this point.
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#208Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is little evidence that AI is replacing engineers, but there is a whole lot of evidence that shareholders and execs really love the idea and are trying every angle to achieve it.
The funny thing is that "replacing engineers" is framed as cutting costs But that doesn't really lead to any market advantage, at least for tech companies. AI will also enable your competitors to cut costs. Who thinks they are going to have a monopoly on AI, which would be required for a durable advantage? --- What you want to do is get more of the rare, best programmers -- that's what shareholders and execs should b…
> AI will also enable your competitors to cut costs.
which is why it puts pressure on your own company to cut costs
it's the same reason why nearly all US companies moved their manufacturing offshore; once some companies did it, everyone had to follow suit or be left behind due to higher costs than their competitors
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#209What evidence do we have that AI is actually replacing programmers already? The article treats messaging on this as a forgone conclusion, but I strongly suspect it's all hype-cycle BS to cover layoffs, or a misreading of "Meta pivots to AI" headlines.
For a lot of tasks like frontend development I’ve found that a tool like cursor can get you pretty far without much prior knowledge. IMO (and experience) many tasks that previously required to hiring a programmer or designer with knowledge of the latest frameworks can now be replaced by one motivated “prompt engineer” and some patience
The deeper it gets you into code without prior knowledge the deeper it gets you into debug hell.
I assume the "motivated prompt engineer" would have to already be an experienced programmer at this point. Do you think someone who has only had an intro to programming / MBA / etc could do this right now with tools like cursor?
Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake
#210What evidence do we have that AI is actually replacing programmers already? The article treats messaging on this as a forgone conclusion, but I strongly suspect it's all hype-cycle BS to cover layoffs, or a misreading of "Meta pivots to AI" headlines.
I'm feeling it at my non-tech company. They want more people to use Copilot and stuff and are giving out more bad ratings and PIPs to push devs out.