The Programmer Identity Crisis

   My [GPT5's -poster's note] take / Reflections
   
   I find the article a useful provocation: 
   it asks us to reflect on what we value in being programmers.
   
   It’s not anti-AI per se, but it is anti-losing-the-core craft.
   
   For someone in your position (in *redacted* / Europe) 
   it raises questions about what kind of programming work you want: 
   deep, challenging, craft-oriented, or more tool/AI mediated.
   
   It might also suggest you think about building skills 
   that are robust to automation: e.g., architecture, 
   critical thinking, complex problem solving, domain knowledge.
   
   The identity crisis is less about “will we have programmers” and 
   more “what shapes will programming roles take”.

Of course, but I said that people see themselves this way.

To be clear, personally I do not find fiddling with configs particularly exciting, but some people do.

With years, as I matured, and the industry matured, I came to realize that corporate programming is assembly line work but with a much bigger paycheck. You can dance around it as much as you want, but in the end, if you truly zoom out, you will realize that it's no different from an assembly line. There are managers to oversee your work and your time allocations; there is a belief that more people = more output; and everyone past your manager's manager seem to think that what you do is trivial and can be easily replaced by robots. So a software engineer who calls himself an artist is basically that same as a woodworker who works for a big furniture company, and yet insists on calling himself an artist, and referring to their work as craft, while in reality they assemble someone's else vision and product, by using industry standard tools.

And at first, I tried to resist. I held strong opinions as the OP. How come they came for MY CRAFT?! But then I realized that there is no craft. Sure, a handful of people work on really cool things. But if you look around, most companies are just plain dumb REST services with a new an outfit slapped on them. There is no craft. The craft has been distilled and filtered into 3-4 popular frameworks that dictate how things should be written, and chances are if I take an engineer and drop them in another company using the same framework, they won't even notice. Craft is when you build something new and unique, not when you deploy NextJS to Vercel with shadcn/ui and look like the other 99% of new-age SaaS offerings.

So I gave up. And I mainly use AI at my $DAY_JOB. Because why not? It was mundane work before (same REST endpoints, but with different names; copying and pasting around common code blocks), and now I don't suffer that much anymore. Instead of navigating the slop that my coworkers wrote before AI, I just review what AI wrote, in small pieces, and make sure it works as expected. Clean code? Hexagonal architecture? Separation of concerns? Give me a break. These are tools for "architects" and "tech leads" to earn a pat on their shoulder and stroke their ego, so they can move to a different company, collecting a bigger paycheck, while I get stuck with their overengineered solutions.

If I want to craft, I write code in my free time when I'm not limited by corner-cutting philosophy, abusive deadlines, and (some) incompetent coworkers each with their ego spanning to the moon as if instead of building a REST service for 7 users, they are building a world transforming and life-saving device for billions (powered by web3/blockchain/AI of course).

It is vastly different because there are no (as far as I've ever seen) multi-thousand line blocks of code to cut & paste as-is from stack overflow.

If you're pasting a couple dozen lines of code from a third party without understanding it, that's bad, but not unbearable to discover in a code review.

But if you're posting a 5000 line pull request that you've never read and expect me to do all your work validating it, we have a problem.