Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Learning to code is still worthwhile

stevekrouse.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 326 posts

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#101

Post by confidantlake »

brewtide wrote: post #88
VariousPrograms wrote: post #76

It's worth learning to harvest with a scythe because it's cheap, good exercise, and has no mechanical parts to fail. The issue isn't whether it's worth learning something in a personal development sense, it's whether it's worth going into massive student loan debt to pursue a career path that was once seen as a ticket to a comfy office job. LLMs probably won't replace top performing software engineers. Will they repl…

Where do these new top notch programmers come from and what proof of top notchness will be required for job proof? (Honest questions)

MIT. A degree from MIT. Kind of joking but not really.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#102

Post by somesortofthing »

yoyohello13 wrote: post #82
somesortofthing wrote: post #63

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You build without knowing by delegating to a system that extrapolates what it knows about you and what you want, and is able to execute on that to deliver faster, better, and more completely than you ever could. You'll live as a ball of intent and values, observing in wonder as everything you desire springs up around you before you know you want it. You could choose not to live like this of course, but it would be li…

I assume you don't ascribe to the thought that friction leads to growth. In this future of complete frictionless existence wont humanity stagnate? In this world of no effort, nothing has meaning.

More or less, yeah. I'm not a proponent of it, I just think there's enough inertia in that direction of short-term vastly-superintelligent AI. Maybe we can figure out how to become subordinate components of a machine like that, but I think that's the best we can reasonably hope for.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#103

Post by gonzalohm »

fragmede wrote: post #80
gonzalohm wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I'm not saying that you should go back to code in assembly. But, come on, you can surely dedicate 30 minutes of your time to read how a CPU works... Just have curiosity would be my advice

At the expense of what, though? That's 30 minutes not spent learning about the business, or talking to customers, or to your kids. Or watching the World Cup. Or reading Hacker News.

You may have to spend 4 hours in the future when something stops working and the AI can't fix it

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#104

Post by llama052 »

p1necone wrote: post #26

Anecdotally, the people who I know who were not particularly good developers pre-llms still manage to produce bad code even using flagship models now. I think having solid knowledge/understanding of good architecture and general practices is still crucial, and it's easy to forget that the foundational knowledge and instinct you take for granted now actually took a lot of time and effort to learn when you were less ex…

100% this. I observe this all the time. LLMs can be a force multiplier but those who don’t ask the right questions or understand the nuance still produce bad code, it’s just amplified. I don’t think any of the current models can avoid that, especially when it’s based on data it’s been fed, which is historically human generated.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#105

Post by patch_dev »

DrewADesign wrote: post #96
StilesCrisis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The babysitting work would still be impossible if you didn't actually know how to code.

Right, but if things progress as they promised, it will require far fewer people to do the same work, which means the industry already has all the people it so need for at least a couple decades. That’s what happened with tool and die guys when offshoring kicked off, and now they’re scrambling to get apprentices because the last of the OG ones are retiring. There were decades that pretty much nobody (relative to prio…

You're making an assumption on what AI lab have promised? The same AI labs that have made a strategy out of lying for hype? Thats crazy man, regardless of whether anything else you're saying is valid.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#106

Post by drTobiasFunke »

DrewADesign wrote: post #96
StilesCrisis wrote: post #77

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The babysitting work would still be impossible if you didn't actually know how to code.

Right, but if things progress as they promised, it will require far fewer people to do the same work, which means the industry already has all the people it so need for at least a couple decades. That’s what happened with tool and die guys when offshoring kicked off, and now they’re scrambling to get apprentices because the last of the OG ones are retiring. There were decades that pretty much nobody (relative to prio…

You are assuming that the amount of work is finite, so more productive people implies fewer people are required. Is that the case though? Has it ever been?

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#107

Post by swsieber »

DrewADesign wrote: post #85
ekidd wrote: post #65

As a professional programmer entering the final third of an enjoyable career, I would now place "learning to code" in the same category as "making a living as a poet." As in, it's truly enjoyable art and some people appreciate it, but you'd better plan for a day job. Senior people who already know how to code are doing OKish for now, from the data I've seen, but the job is increasingly babysitting models like they we…

Yeah. I’ve been saying that for a while (and switched fields entirely.) People were getting hung up on the idea that an LLM could not truly replace a developer, and that’s true, but it doesn’t matter. For the job market to be severely impacted, you just need to reduce the number of people required to do the parts of the job that LLMs suck at, and that only requires increased efficiency for existing developers. Even i…

> Even if your average developer is a measly 30% more efficient, that might create 20% less demand for developers

I mean it might. But I wouldn't rule out Jevon's paradox where the increased efficiency increases demand.

Build more roads, congestion gets worse. Make developers more efficient, demand for developers increases. I wouldn't be surprised if demand for bespoke software goes up.

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#108

Post by david-gpu »

drTobiasFunke wrote: post #106
DrewADesign wrote: post #96

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Right, but if things progress as they promised, it will require far fewer people to do the same work, which means the industry already has all the people it so need for at least a couple decades. That’s what happened with tool and die guys when offshoring kicked off, and now they’re scrambling to get apprentices because the last of the OG ones are retiring. There were decades that pretty much nobody (relative to prio…

You are assuming that the amount of work is finite, so more productive people implies fewer people are required. Is that the case though? Has it ever been?

> You are assuming that the amount of work is finite, so more productive people implies fewer people are required. Is that the case though? Has it ever been?

How many horse farriers have you met? How many coopers, blacksmiths, or shoemakers?

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#109

Post by Wowfunhappy »

DrewADesign wrote: post #85
ekidd wrote: post #65

As a professional programmer entering the final third of an enjoyable career, I would now place "learning to code" in the same category as "making a living as a poet." As in, it's truly enjoyable art and some people appreciate it, but you'd better plan for a day job. Senior people who already know how to code are doing OKish for now, from the data I've seen, but the job is increasingly babysitting models like they we…

Yeah. I’ve been saying that for a while (and switched fields entirely.) People were getting hung up on the idea that an LLM could not truly replace a developer, and that’s true, but it doesn’t matter. For the job market to be severely impacted, you just need to reduce the number of people required to do the parts of the job that LLMs suck at, and that only requires increased efficiency for existing developers. Even i…

Did Object Oriented programming create less demand for developers?

Re: Learning to code is still worthwhile

#110

Post by tzs »

adamddev1 wrote: post #33

Please correct me if I'm wrong, but aren't AI agents replacing the coding mostly being done on the outer layers of development? I mean, end user applications, apps, dashboards, business applications? On this "outer crust" people can maybe tolerate things with 99% accuracy, or bloated code. A vibe coded app can be argued to be "good enough." (Even then, look at the disaster that Microsoft apps have become post AI adop…

Aren't the things in your second paragraph only a small fraction of coding jobs?

If we end up with those being the kind of jobs you have to get to make a living as a programmer we could end up with programming a lot like sports.

You can enjoy playing basketball, say, as an amateur, and you can play more seriously in high school and college, but if you want to make a living playing basketball you need to be good enough to make the NBA.

Post reply on HN