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

The recurring dream of replacing developers

caimito.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

181–190 of 535 posts

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#181

Post by falloutx »

kelipso wrote: post #173
falloutx wrote: post #163

Earlier quoted context omitted.

>The customer will have little idea what is even possible and will ask for a product that doesn't solve their actual problem. How do you know that? For tech products most of the users are also technically literate and can easily use Claude Code or whatever tool we are using. They easily tell CC specifically what they need. Unless you create social media apps or bank apps, the customers are pretty tech savvy.

One example is programmers who would code physics simulations that run in massive data. You need a decent amount of software engineering skills to maintain software like that but the programmer maybe has a BS in Physics but doesn’t really know the nuances of the actual algorithm being implemented. With AI, probably you don’t need 95% of the programmers who do that job anyway. Physicists who know the algorithm much be…

Yes, I made the same point. Customers are not as dumb as our PMs and Execs think they are. They know their needs more than us, unless its about social media and banks.

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#183

Post by devsda »

rectang wrote: post #78
mattgreenrocks wrote: post #71

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Remains to be seen for production settings. My guess is no. I’ve seen people talk about understanding the output of their vibe coding sessions as “nerdy,” implying they’re above that. Refusing the vet AI output is the kiss of death to velocity.

> Refusing the vet AI output is the kiss of death to velocity. The usual rejoinder I've seen is that AI can just rewrite your whole system when complexity explodes. But I see at least two problems with that. AI is impressively good at extracting intent from a ball of mud with tons of accidental complexity, and I think we can expect it to continue improving. But when a system has a lot of inherent complexity, and it's…

> The usual rejoinder I've seen is that AI can just rewrite your whole system when complexity explodes.

Live and even offline data transformation and data migration without issues are still difficult problems to solve even for humans. It requires meticulous planning and execution.

A rewrite has to either discard the previous data or transform or keep the data layer intact across versions which means more and more tangled spaghetti accumulated over rewrites.

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#184

Post by altmanaltman »

array_key_first wrote: post #132
enos_feedler wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Of course that is true. The nuance here is that software isn’t just getting cheaper but the activity to build it is changing. Instead of writing lines of code you are writing requirements. That shifts who can do the job. The customer might be able to do it themselves. This removes a market, not grows one. I am not saying the market will collapse just be careful applying a blunt theory to such a profound technological…

There are also technical requirements, which, in practice, you will need to make for applications. Technical requirements can be done by people that can't program, but it is very close to programming. You reach a manner of specification where you're designing schemas, formatting specs, high level algorithms, and APIs. Programmers can be, and are, good at this, and the people doing it who aren't programmers would be g…

I think it's like super insane people think that anyone can just "code" an app with AI and that can replace actual paid or established open-source software, especially if they are not a programmer or know how to think like one. It might seem super obvious if you work in tech but most people don't even know what an HTTP server is or what is pytho, let alone understanding best practices or any kind of high-level thinking regarding applications and code. And if you're willing to spend that time in learning all that, might as well learn programming as well.

AI usage in coding will not stop ofc but normal people vibe coding production-ready apps is a pipedream that has many issues independent of how good the AI/tools are.

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#186

Post by herval »

tejtm wrote: post #118
xnx wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Machinery made farmers more efficient and now there are more farmers than ever.

Pre industrial revolution something like 80+ percent of the population was involved in agriculture. I question the assertion of more farmers now especially since an ever growing percentage of farms are not even owned by corporeal entities never mind actual farmers. ooohhh I think I missed the intent of the statement... well done!

80% of the world population back then is less than 50% of the current number of people working in farming, so the assertion isn’t wrong, even if fewer people are working on farming proportionally (as it should be, as more complex, desirable and higher paid options exist)

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#187

Post by azan_ »

eks391 wrote: post #179
azan_ wrote: post #161

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The pattern that gets missed in these discussions: every "no-code will replace developers" wave actually creates more developer jobs, not fewer. Doesn't mean it will happen this time (i.e. if AI truly becomes what was promised) and actually it's not likely it will!

I felt like the article had a good argument for why the AI hype will similarly be unsuccessful at erasing developers. > AI changes how developers work rather than eliminating the need for their judgment. The complexity remains. Someone must understand the business problem, evaluate whether the generated code solves it correctly, consider security implications, ensure it integrates properly with existing systems, and…

> evaluate whether the generated code solves it correctly, consider security implications, ensure it integrates properly with existing systems, and maintain it as requirements evolve

I think you are basing your reasoning on the current generation of models. But if future generation will be able to do everything you've listed above, what work will be there left for developers? I'm not saying that we will ever get such models, just that when they appear, they will actually displace developers and not create more jobs for them. The business problem will be specified by business people, and even if they get it wrong it won't matter because iteration will be quick and cheap.

> What is your rebuttal to this argument leading to the idea that developers do need to fear for their job security?

The entire argument is based on assumption that models won't get better and will never be able to do things you've listed! But once they become capable of these things - what work will be there for developers?

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#188

Post by DoctorOetker »

falloutx wrote: post #165
xnx wrote: post #81

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Machinery made farmers more efficient and now there are more farmers than ever.

Wait what? There are way less farmers than we had in the past. In many parts of the world, every member of the family was working on the farm, and now only 1 person can do the work of 5-10 people.

the comment was obviously intended to make you think: yes there are fewer human farmers, and more mechanical ones.

Re: The recurring dream of replacing developers

#189

Post by 1718627440 »

enos_feedler wrote: post #85
zby wrote: post #68

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Classic Jevons Paradox - when something gets cheaper the market for it grows. The unit cost shrinks but the number of units bought grows more than this shrinkage.

Of course that is true. The nuance here is that software isn’t just getting cheaper but the activity to build it is changing. Instead of writing lines of code you are writing requirements. That shifts who can do the job. The customer might be able to do it themselves. This removes a market, not grows one. I am not saying the market will collapse just be careful applying a blunt theory to such a profound technological…

> Instead of writing lines of code you are writing requirements.

https://www.commitstrip.com/en/2016/08/25/a-very-comprehensi...

Post reply on HN