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

Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

defragzone.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

101–110 of 886 posts

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#101

Post by kamaal »

pyrale wrote: post #11

We have fired all our programmers. However, the AI is hard to work with, it expects specific wording in order to program our code as expected. We have hired people with expertise in the specific language needed to transmit our specifications to the AI with more precision.

>>However, the AI is hard to work with, it expects specific wording in order to program our code as expected.

Speaking English to make something is one thing, but speaking English to modify something complicated is absolutely something else. And Im pretty sure involves more or less the same effort as writing code itself. Of course regression for this something like this is not for the faint hearted.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#102

Post by franktankbank »

fakedang wrote: post #99
soco wrote: post #95

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But the question is, are we there yet? I have yet to hear of an AI bot who can eat up a requirement and add said new form in the right place, or fiddle with a layout. Do you know any? So all those big promises you read right now are outright lies. When will we reach that point? I don't do gambling. But we are not there, regardless what the salespeople or fancy journalists might be claiming all day long.

Cursor already does the latter task pretty well, as I'm sure other AI agents already do. AI struggles only when it's something complex, like dealing with a geometric object, or plugging together infra, or programme logic. Last year, I built a reasonably complicated e-commerce project wholly with AI, using the zod library and some pretty convoluted e-commerce logic. While it was a struggle, I was able to build it out…

> Now shipping it to production? That's something AI will struggle at, but humans also struggle at that :(

Why? Just because that's where the rubber hits the road? It's a different skillset but AI can do systems design too and probably direct a knowledgable but unpracticed implementer.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#103

Post by franktankbank »

snackbroken wrote: post #58
baq wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Once AI achieves runaway self improvement predicting the future is even more pointless than it is today. You’re looking at an economy in which the best human is worse at any and all jobs than the worst robot. There are no past examples to extrapolate from.

Once AI achieves runaway self improvement, it will be subject to natural selection pressures. This does not bode well for any organisms competing in its niche for data center resources.

This doesn't sound right, seems like you are jumping metaphors. The computing resources are the limit on the evolution speed. There's nothing that makes an individual desirous of a faster evolution speed.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#104

Post by aleph_minus_one »

Draiken wrote: post #86
netcan wrote: post #67

Our ability to predict technological "replacement" is pretty shoddy. Take banking for example. ATMs are literally called "teller machines." Internet banking is a way of "automating banking." Besides those, every administrative aspect of banking went from paper to computer. Do banks employ fewer people? Is it a smaller industry? No. Banks grew steadily over these decades. It's actually shocking how little network enab…

Yes banks employ less people. In my country there are now account managers handling hundreds of clients virtually. Most of the local managers got fired. I find it easy to say from our privileged position that "tech might replace workers but it'll be fine". Even if all the replaced people aren't unemployed, salaries go down and standards of living for them fall off a cliff. Tech innovation destroys lives in our curren…

> Tech innovation destroys lives in our current capitalist society because only the owners get the benefits.

If you want to become a (partial) owner, buy stocks. :-)

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#105

Post by Draiken »

yodsanklai wrote: post #98
Draiken wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Because a high level developer will still have to fix all the shit the AI gets wrong, and therefore won't be "2x more productive" like I read in many places. If they're that much better with AI, they were likely coding greenfield CRUD boilerplate that nobody uses anyways. When the AI generated crap is actually used, it becomes evident how bad it is. But yes, this will reduce team sizes regardless of it being good or…

I'd say this is a lot of wishful thinking. Personally, I know that I'm more productive with AI. In my personal projects, I can tackle bigger projects than what would have been possible otherwise. Will that reduce the demand for programmers? I hope not, but it's plausible at least.

What is wishful about my comment?

I've used and still use AI, but it would be wishful thinking to say I'm significantly more productive.

As you just said: in your personal projects - that 99.9% of the time will never be seen/used by anyone but you - AI helps. It's a great tool to hack and play around when there are little/no stakes involved, not much else.

I believe it will reduce demand for programmers at least for a while, since companies touting they're replacing people with AI will learn its shortcomings once the real world hits them. Or maybe they won't since the shitty software they were building in the first place was so trivial that AI can actually do it.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#106

Post by guiriduro »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #36

Well, what will happen, is that programmers will become experts at prompt engineering, which will become a real discipline (remember when “software engineering” was a weird niche?). They will blow away the companies that rely on “seat of the pants,” undisciplined prompting. I’m someone that started on Machine Language, and now programs in high-level languages. I remember when we couldn’t imagine programming without I…

The ability of LLMs to replicate MBA CEO-speak and the kinds of activities the C-suite engage in is arguably superior to their ability to write computer programs and displace programmers, so on a replicated-skills basis LLMs should pose a greater risk to CEOs. Of course, CEO success is only loosely aligned with ability, nor can LLMs obtain the "who you know" aspect from reflection alone.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#107

Post by Draiken »

aleph_minus_one wrote: post #104
Draiken wrote: post #86

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yes banks employ less people. In my country there are now account managers handling hundreds of clients virtually. Most of the local managers got fired. I find it easy to say from our privileged position that "tech might replace workers but it'll be fine". Even if all the replaced people aren't unemployed, salaries go down and standards of living for them fall off a cliff. Tech innovation destroys lives in our curren…

> Tech innovation destroys lives in our current capitalist society because only the owners get the benefits. If you want to become a (partial) owner, buy stocks. :-)

Do I really own Intel/Tesla/Microsoft by buying their stock? No I don't.

I can't influence anything on any of these companies unless I was already a billionaire with a real seat at the table.

Even on startups where, in theory, employees have some skin in the game, it's not really how it works is it? You still can't influence almost anything and you're susceptible to all the bad decisions the founders will make to appease investors.

Call me crazy but to say I own something, I have to at least be able to control some of it. Otherwise it's wishful thinking.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#108

Post by pentel-0_5 »

bigfatkitten wrote: post #19

For each programmer who actually spends their time on complex design work or fixing difficult bugs, there are many more doing what amounts to clerical work. Adding a new form here, fiddling with a layout there. It is the latter class who are in real danger.

[flagged]

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#109

Post by NoGravitas »

yodsanklai wrote: post #42
bloomingkales wrote: post #29

I'm sure there is a formal proof someone can flesh out. - Half assed developer can construct a functional program with AI prompts. - Deployed at scale for profit - Many considerations were not considered due to lack of expertise (security, for example) - Bad things happen for users. I have at least two or three ideas that I've canned for now because it's just not safe for users (AI apps of that type require a lot of…

Why half-assed developer? It could be high-level developer that take advantage of AI to be more productive. This will reduce team sizes.

If that's the way this goes (that for a large program you only need a senior developer and an AI, not a senior developer and some juniors), then it kills the pipeline for producing the senior developers who will still be needed.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#110

Post by NoGravitas »

baq wrote: post #39
batuhandumani wrote: post #28

Such writings, articles, and sayings remind me of the Luddite movement. Unfortunately, preventing what is to come is not within our control. By fighting against windmills, one only bends the spear in hand. The Zeitgeist indicates that this will happen soon or in the near future. Even though developers are intelligent, hardworking, and good at their jobs, they will always be lacking and helpless in some way against th…

Once AI achieves runaway self improvement predicting the future is even more pointless than it is today. You’re looking at an economy in which the best human is worse at any and all jobs than the worst robot. There are no past examples to extrapolate from.

Ah yes, (sniff). Today we are all eating from the trashcan of ideology.
Post reply on HN