Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change • Hacker News Board

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#151

Post by dboreham » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:24 PM UTC

smokedetector1 wrote: post #20

Interesting. However just because this is true right now doesn't mean it will be true going forward. Unique to the current moment is that there are simultaneously (1) high interest rates and a challenging economy (2) a narrative that AI adoption should enable cutting junior roles. This could lead to companies that would anyway be doing layoffs choosing to lay off or not hire juniors, and replace with AI adoption. To…

Interest rates are not high. High-er than the post 2008 era yes. Not historically high though.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#152

Post by scarface_74 » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:24 PM UTC

neutronicus wrote: post #144

JustExAWS wrote: post #99

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How much cheaper are younger developers overall? If you look at the delta between junior and mid level developers in most industries - ie enterprise dev not BigTech or adjacent - it’s really not that much

It's a down market and you might be better able to retain them if the market turns up again (or maybe not, I'm old and mostly just want a remote gig where I have time to parent my child).

In an up market it’s going to be worse. HR is still going to hold the line on raises and not keep up with the market.

I’m old too - 51. But I consistently tell young people to chase money. Target BigTech or adjacent companies, “grind leetCode”, avoid startups and Monopoly money “equity”, etc.

One person I mentored when they were an intern in 2021 and when they came back the next year, is 25 years old making $220K (Solution Architect not a developer) and I couldn’t be happier for them. They make the same as I make now. But I’ve already raised two (step)kids, bought and sold the big house in the burbs, etc and love working remotely.

I told them to do whatever it takes to be seen, promote themselves, build a network internally and with clients and make all the money they can.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#153

Post by dboreham » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:27 PM UTC

petcat wrote: post #36

We had some marketing folks give us a company-wide demo of Chat GPT and some other Gen AI tools and showed us how cool it is and how quick they can make stylish and sophisticated pitch decks and marketing materials now. And the entire time I'm watching this I'm just thinking that they don't realize that they are only demonstrating the tools that are going to replace their own jobs. Kinda sad, really. Demand for soft…

Those marketing people may also be engaging in small talk about sports teams on the phone with customers, doing sushi and karaoke with customers, procuring coke and hookers for customers... LLMs can't yet do that. Unless the customer is also an LLM of course.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#154

Post by jopsen » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:31 PM UTC

Isn't this just economic uncertainty, after math of the hiring spree following covid, macro economic conditions (interest rate, etc).

It still feels too early to predict the outcome, winds may change again.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#155

Post by sk5t » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:33 PM UTC

trod1234 wrote: post #123

lukev wrote: post #18

It's pretty clear this is happening. The question is... is this based on existing capability of LLMs to do these jobs? Or are companies doing this on the expectation that AI is advanced enough to pick up the slack? I have observed a disconnect in which management is typically far more optimistic about AI being capable of performing a specific task than are the workers who currently perform that task. And to what exte…

The question of reasoning doesn't really matter once you show its happening. When you constrict the market like they have done, you naturally get distortions, and the adversarial nature of the market fails to perform economic calculation potentially leading to grave consequences. Even at this point, whipsaws would be quite destructive. I know people who have abandoned their careers due to lack of job availability for…

How does one concretely prepare for socio-economic collapse, beyond taking a long position in canned goods?

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#156

Post by thw_9a83c » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:34 PM UTC

MDGeist wrote: post #102

thw_9a83c wrote: post #29

In the future, there will be two kinds of companies: 1. Those that encourage people to use AI agents aggressively to increase productivity. 2. Those that encourage people to use AI agents aggressively to be more productive while still hiring young people. Which type of company will be more innovative, productive, and successful in the long run?

Kinda feels like a lot of companies think they can be option 1 because someone else will be option 2, and then they'll hire the young people away after they become experienced.

...I was afraid someone would point out this potentially slimy scenario.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#157

Post by dudeinjapan » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:36 PM UTC

"Seniority-bias" is the wrong word. It's "skill-bias", or better yet, "tacit-knowledge bias".

The reason why old hands (who have been in the game long enough to be promoted to something approximating "Senior") are so deadly with AI is because they know all the traps/pitfalls to watch out for. Sure, the AIs may become good enough in 5-10 years to have learned all these pitfalls, but make hay while the sun is shining!

"Senior EMs" who are pure HR managers/non-coders will be priced-out of their jobs in an AI agentic world, as (surprise!) you can't report AI agents to HR. Juniors who can use AI effectively will thrive and climbs the ranks rapidly.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#158

Post by cheschire » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:40 PM UTC

dboreham wrote: post #151

smokedetector1 wrote: post #20

Interesting. However just because this is true right now doesn't mean it will be true going forward. Unique to the current moment is that there are simultaneously (1) high interest rates and a challenging economy (2) a narrative that AI adoption should enable cutting junior roles. This could lead to companies that would anyway be doing layoffs choosing to lay off or not hire juniors, and replace with AI adoption. To…

Interest rates are not high. High-er than the post 2008 era yes. Not historically high though.

Why do people keep saying this? Sure interest rates were high a long time ago but right now today there are a crap load of people with low interest rate mortgages effectively trapped in their houses.

When more than half of the population has a 5% or higher mortgage rate then you can start to say it’s not that high.

https://calculatedrisk.substack.com/p/fhfas-national-mortgag...

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#159

Post by Andrex » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:40 PM UTC

jexe wrote: post #108

PolicyPhantom wrote: post #22

Generative AI may automate some entry-level tasks, but young professionals are not just “replaceable labor.” They bring growth potential, adaptation, and social learning. Without frameworks to manage AI’s role, we risk undermining the very training grounds that prepare the next generation of experts.

That's a lot to invest in someone at a large comparative loss, in a world where employees don't last more than a couple years before job hopping.

Maybe this is unpopular, but what if 5/10-year long contracts started getting traction?

I guess you'd need to trust the company, which is hard to come by.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#160

Post by TuringNYC » Tue, Sep 16, 2025, 6:40 PM UTC

jparishy wrote: post #113

lukev wrote: post #18

It's pretty clear this is happening. The question is... is this based on existing capability of LLMs to do these jobs? Or are companies doing this on the expectation that AI is advanced enough to pick up the slack? I have observed a disconnect in which management is typically far more optimistic about AI being capable of performing a specific task than are the workers who currently perform that task. And to what exte…

to me it is just market pressure to exploit the high stress on laborers atm. the level of uncertainty today is only a problem if you don't have a ton of existing capital, which everyone in charge does. so they are insulated and can treat people poorly without repercussions. in a market that prefers short term profits, they will then do this in order to make more money right now. companies must do this, 'cause if they…

How about an alternative potential explanation -- AI is great at bits and pieces but not great at everything, and definitely not good at stitching together all the various pieces. So you need someone experienced to fill in the gaps and integrate all the vibe-coded bits.

This is what I see, but want to hear others' experiences.