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

Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

papers.ssrn.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

51–60 of 197 posts

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#51

Post by basscomm »

Workaccount2 wrote: post #16
softwaredoug wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Junior devs eventually will have been brought up with agentic coding, etc. Hopefully whatever the "new way" becomes is how they'll be taught. Currently part of the problem is the taboo using AI coding in undergrad CS programs. And I don't know the answer. But someone will find the right way to teach new/better ways of working with and without generative AI. It may just become second nature to everyone.

Kids are always the best with technology. The generation in high school right now will be god tier at getting results from LLMs.

Not even a little bit. Where I work we regularly churn through kids just out of college and most of them don't have Clue One how to operate anything on their computer.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#52

Post by osigurdson »

toomuchtodo wrote: post #23
osigurdson wrote: post #21

What happens when companies refuse to hire, even though there is an obvious need? It has to lead to reduced growth. If the majority of companies do this, I would think it would lead to a severe deflationary cycle.

They burn out employees until a failure mode is reached.

If a few companies do this it is probably fine, but more interesting if most companies do this. It seems that it would be akin to a self inflicted depression with severe deflation.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#53

Post by Ragnarork »

softwaredoug wrote: post #12
FrustratedMonky wrote: post #7

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In 10 years where do the senior dev's come from? Real question. Seems like with lower entry level jobs now, in 10 years there won't be seniors to hire.

Junior devs eventually will have been brought up with agentic coding, etc. Hopefully whatever the "new way" becomes is how they'll be taught. Currently part of the problem is the taboo using AI coding in undergrad CS programs. And I don't know the answer. But someone will find the right way to teach new/better ways of working with and without generative AI. It may just become second nature to everyone.

> Junior devs eventually will have been brought up with agentic coding

But if they're not hired...?

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#54

Post by neutronicus »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #7
zeuch wrote: post #2

New Harvard's study (62M workers, 285k firms) shows firms adopting generative AI cut junior hiring sharply while continuing to grow senior roles — eroding the bottom rungs of career ladders and reshaping how careers start.

In 10 years where do the senior dev's come from? Real question. Seems like with lower entry level jobs now, in 10 years there won't be seniors to hire.

From the bread line, after they've all been displaced by AI, if you happen to need one for God knows what reason, the CEOs are hoping

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#55

Post by thw_9a83c »

s46dxc5r7tv8 wrote: post #48
thw_9a83c wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

While agentic coding can make you productive, it won't teach you to deeply understand the source code, algorithms, or APIs produced by AI. If you can't thoroughly audit any source code created by an AI agent, then you are definitely not a senior developer.

This is just not true. I have witnessed people who would have been called dabblers or tinkerers just a few years ago become actual developers by using cursor. They ask a few key questions when they get stuck about engineering best practices and really internalize them. They read the code they are producing and ask the assistant questions about their codebase. They are theorycrafting using AI then implementing and tes…

You're talking about people who put in a significant non-trivial effort to thoroughly understand the code produced by the AI. For them, AI was just one path to becoming proficient developers. They would have gotten there even before the AI boom. I was not talking about such highly-motivated people.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#56

Post by zdragnar »

koakuma-chan wrote: post #34
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?

I don't understand how you want innovation and productivity in a world with rapidly increasing population. We need less and less people while producing more and more people. Where am I wrong?

Recently there was a splash in the news about the US death rate projected to exceed the birth rate by 2031.

Many of the largest countries are experiencing similar declines, with fewer and fewer countries maintaining large birth rates.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#57

Post by johnrob »

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…

LLMs are good at creating single use documents, like a pitch deck used for one prospective customer (never to be used again). But for long lived documents, on which future work builds atop, the bar is higher and the value of LLMs is more grey.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#58

Post by skiffer »

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.

[dead]

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#59

Post by ModernMech »

FrustratedMonky wrote: post #7
zeuch wrote: post #2

New Harvard's study (62M workers, 285k firms) shows firms adopting generative AI cut junior hiring sharply while continuing to grow senior roles — eroding the bottom rungs of career ladders and reshaping how careers start.

In 10 years where do the senior dev's come from? Real question. Seems like with lower entry level jobs now, in 10 years there won't be seniors to hire.

They will be promoted but they won't have the requisite experience. We'll have people in the highest positions with the usual titles, but they will be severely underqualified. Enshitification will ensue.

Re: Generative AI as Seniority-Biased Technological Change

#60

Post by DebtDeflation »

zeuch wrote: post #3

If entry-level roles are shrinking, how should companies rethink talent development? Without the traditional “bottom rungs,” how do we grow future seniors if fewer juniors ever get the chance to start?

The plan seems to be to hope that AI will be able to replace the senior ICs in the near future. They're certainly gutting the ranks of management today in a way that presupposes there will be far fewer ICs of all levels to manage soon.
Post reply on HN