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

AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

franciscotrindade.me

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

131–140 of 151 posts

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#131

Post by beej71 »

jtrn wrote: post #113
Kim_Bruning wrote: post #105

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It turns out that this almost works. You'd probably want to commit explicit design documents btw, not every last prompt. FWIW, when people try this out in practice, they tend to commit the design docs alongside the generated tests and the generated code. Mutating the docs then leads to mutations in the code. Several friends and I have workflows that look a bit like this, but I know for sure mine isn't 100% strict(yet…

Thank you for the first sensible response that actually engages with the point I made. And your answer is better than mine, and less angry.... :P The question from glouwbug was just taken for granted to be "no, and therefore the analogy fails." And if I understand your answer, it's basically: "no, but we're visibly closer every quarter, and here's what the intermediate state looks like, and we might even get there" T…

I think your FORTRAN analogy depends on the assertion that a design doc is some kind of technical abstraction, like a compiler or a for-loop. And there's a lot of disagreement with that premise. :)

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#132

Post by ChoGGi »

21asdffdsa12 wrote: post #85
codegeek wrote: post #82

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"The worst part is that AI is covering up their deficiencies. They don’t know what skills they lack. They don’t even know what skills are required because they haven’t put the effort in." This is the biggest issue with AI. It is incredible when in the right hands (Senior devs who know good fundamentals and know how to code) but really bad when in wrong hands (Juniors with no fundamentals but they are made to believe…

So how do you design a harness that tries to grow the user? As in quiz the prompter in a way that forces them to reflect and improve? And if they can do that- could they do it to themselves- going from a junior to a pro conversation?

You don't understand math with a calculator; you use paper to understand math.

The same way you wouldn't let a junior electrician near a drill, he gets screwdrivers till he learns to be gentle.

AI should only be for people with existing knowledge of a trade.

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#133

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

beej71 wrote: post #121
jtrn wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Obviously not. Abstraction levels in projects management would go from something like: lower, “what should we name individual tasks items” to higher “what personalities are best suited for incident response handling”, or agile vs waterfall. While technology layers would go from “who has the best transistors tech” to “should we use windows or macOS?” Edit insertion for clarification: The compiler, framework usage, AI…

> While technology layers would go from “who has the best transistors tech” to “should we use windows or macOS?” Those sound dangerously close to project management decisions. What about tech layers closer to coding?

I don't see that at all. These look like typical decisions that a technical team lead would make and then inform project management of the decision.

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#134

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

glouwbug wrote: post #96
throwatdem12311 wrote: post #8

> The junior engineer executes it, which nowadays means prompting it to an AI tool, and creating a pull request (PR). The PR receives feedback from more senior engineers. The junior engineer gets the feedback and takes it to the AI tool again, proposing changes. Yeah this part should not exist anymore. It doesn’t where I work. When I get a PR I just ask an agent to make the proposed changes. There is absolutely zero…

Is all of hackernews webdev only? I can’t imagine “coding not being a job anymore” in fields like automotive, medical, military, robotics, and HPC

I'm in Medical Devices and while AI is at best a small part of development right now, rest assured that we are actively investigating how to make it an approved part of our process. Then again, coding was only ever a small part of our job.

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#135

Post by HeyLaughingBoy »

fzeroracer wrote: post #111
throwatdem12311 wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

We do architecture reviews now. Code reviews are going away because agents handle it. When I ask an agent to do a code change for a PR, it’s because it’s not something I think the other engineer really should waste their time on. It’s on the same level as nitpicking what lines the braces go on before we had auto-formatters and lint checkers in CI. Other staff engineers I rarely even see their code. I trust them to be…

> We do architecture reviews now. Code reviews are going away because agents handle it. So you already failed the first part of doing your goddamn job as an engineer which is reviewing and owning code. Code review is a vital part of that, because code ownership is a responsibility shared by your entire team. We used to say that cowboy coders were a disaster for your team and now you're saying everyone on your team is…

Jesus, this rant is so eerily similar to one I read 25 years ago when someone explained why they stopped using C and started using C++ that I wouldn't be surprised to find that you are the same one who was complaining back then.

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#136

Post by preg_match »

dns_snek wrote: post #120
hawaiianbrah wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really disagree with that stance. It would be trivial to have it ask you questions about what it produced to ensure you understand. I’ve literally already done that several times.

"Understanding" someone else's solution is not comparable to solving it on your own, even if you can answer some questions about it. It builds extremely fragile surface-level understanding. That struggle and repeated failure before finally connecting the dots on your own is how you build intuition and deep understanding.

Yes, all learning takes practice, it's the core of how our brain learns things. Any tool that eliminates the practice part means suboptimal, or zero, learning. Practice isn't just for physical tasks like riding a bike. All skills take practice, meaning repeated cycles of failures over a long time horizon.

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#137

Post by headchipper »

mrhottakes wrote: post #94
headchipper wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

[flagged]

You're far enough behind that you had to create a burner account to tell someone to self-harm.

is that supposed to be an insult or random angry words inspired by the labor of clicking a profile link

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#138

Post by roto »

_joel wrote: post #24
throwatdem12311 wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I basically only use Fable, and no it isn’t. Coding isn’t engineering.

"Software Engineer" is a thing.

Not here in Canada, nor many places where Engineer is a protected term.

Re: AI didn't erase the junior engineer's value, it increased it it

#140

Post by birdsongs »

glouwbug wrote: post #99
tuesdaynight wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I don't think this is related to culture, it's just the internet nowadays. You need hot takes for engagement. That user probably runs with that mindset always on

Or, you know, just plain ol’ racism

Yeah, exactly.
Post reply on HN