AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
1–10 of 481 posts
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#2>Of course, the junior + AI pairing was tempting. It looked cheaper and played into the fear that “AI will take our jobs.”
Those are two different narratives. One implies that everyone will be able to code and build: "English as a programming language", etc. The other is one of those headless-chicken, apocalyptic scenarios where AI has already made (or will very shortly make) human programmers obsolete.
"AI taking jobs" means everyone's job. I won't even comment on the absurdity of that idea; to me, it only comes from people who've never worked professionally.
At the end of the day, companies will take any vaguely reasonable excuse to cull juniors and save money. It's just business. LLMs are simply the latest excuse, though yes, they do improve productivity, to varying degrees depending on what exactly you work on.
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#3>Of course, the junior + AI pairing was tempting. It looked cheaper and played into the fear that “AI will take our jobs.” Those are two different narratives. One implies that everyone will be able to code and build: "English as a programming language", etc. The other is one of those headless-chicken, apocalyptic scenarios where AI has already made (or will very shortly make) human programmers obsolete. "AI taking jo…
> Those are two different narratives.
Also, those two narratives are sometimes deployed as a false-dichotomy, where both just make the same assumption that LLM weaknesses will vanish and dramatic improvement will continue indefinitely.
A historical analogy:
* A: "Segway™ balancing vehicles will be so beneficially effective that private vehicles will be rare in 2025."
* B: "No, Segways™ will be so harmfully effective that people will start to suffer from lower body atrophy by 2025."
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#4For the same reason that an amateur with a powertool ends up in the emergency room and a seasoned pro knows which way to point the business end. AI is in many ways a powertool, if you don't know what you are doing it will help you to do that much more efficiently. If you do know what you are doing it will do the same.
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#5Ai amplifies intelligence/skill
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#6Ai amplifies intelligence/skill
I would refute that and say AI only amplifies knowledge, but doesn't make anyone more skilled or intelligent.
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#7>Of course, the junior + AI pairing was tempting. It looked cheaper and played into the fear that “AI will take our jobs.” Those are two different narratives. One implies that everyone will be able to code and build: "English as a programming language", etc. The other is one of those headless-chicken, apocalyptic scenarios where AI has already made (or will very shortly make) human programmers obsolete. "AI taking jo…
> "AI taking jobs" means everyone's job. I won't even comment on the absurdity of that idea; to me, it only comes from people who've never worked professionally.
I work professionally (I am even a bit renowned) and still believe AI will take my (and everyone's) job.
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#8Ai amplifies intelligence/skill
I'm not cynical enough to believe that the avalanche of slop we're wading through represents something above our collective innate level of intelligence and skill.
Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#9Re: AI was supposed to help juniors shine. Why does it mostly make seniors stronger?
#10Because it's too unpredictable so far. AI saves me time, but only because I could do everything it attempts to do myself.
It's wrong maybe 40-50% of the time, so I can't even imagine the disasters I'm averting by recognising when it's giving me completely bonkers suggestions.