A coder considers the waning days of the craft

Him: Coding will soon be obsolete, it will all be replaced by chatgpt-type code gen.

Me: OK but the overwhelming majority of my job as a "senior engineer" is about communication, organizational leadership, and actually understanding all the product requirements and how they will interface with our systems. Yes, I write code, but even if most of that were augmented with codegen, that would barely even change most of what I do.

Automatic program generation from human language really feels like the same problem with machine translation between human languages. I have an elementary understanding of French and so when I see a passage machine translated into French (regardless of software, Google Translate or DeepL) I cannot find any mistakes; I may even learn a few new words. But to the professional translator, the passage is full of mistakes, non-idiomatic expressions and other weirdness. You aren't going to see publishers publishing entirely machine translated books.

I suspect the same thing happens for LLM-written programs. The average person finds them useful; the expert finds them riddled with bugs. When the stakes are low, like tourists not speaking the native language, machine translation is fine. So will many run-once programs destined for a specific purpose. When the stakes are high, human craft is still needed.

AI cannot sustain itself trained on AI work. If new languages, engines etc pop up it cannot synthesize new forms of coding without that code having existed in the first place. And most importantly, it cannot fundamentally rationalize about what code does or how it functions.

The more you use it or try to integrate it into your workflow (or worse, have others try to integrate it on their own) the more the inherent flaws of the LLMs come into play.

Coding to me is the same to those 'crafts', with GPT it will be done faster and more efficient, that is it.