Earlier quoted context omitted.
They also never said anything about being employed. You are being narrow minded here.
Again, I disagree and reaffirm my being full of inquisitiveness. You are being downright unpleasant and I don't think we should continue this conversation further until you open your mind.
The future of software development is software developers
581–588 of 588 posts
Re: The future of software development is software developers
#582Re: The future of software development is software developers
#583One thing that many of these kinds of articles don't really talk about but that also emphasizes their point is that there will be an increase in interfaces/languages for software developers to do increasingly specialized for work. As such, there will be more compilers, vms, dsls, etc which means that there will be more of a demand for developers who have this skillset. Ideally, this should lead to more folks becoming…
I would agrue as LLMs increase in capability, the demand for new languages will collapse.
Re: The future of software development is software developers
#584Most people in this thread are quibbling about the exact degree of utility LLMs provide, which a tedious argument. What's more interesting to me is, per the article, the concern regarding everyone who is leaning into LLMs without realizing (or downplaying) the exorbitant, externalized cost. Our current LLM usage is being subsidized to the point of being free by outside investment. One day when the well runs dry, you…
Re: The future of software development is software developers
#585Earlier quoted context omitted.
LLMs cannot generate coherent sentences LLMs writing prose is too robotic LLMs output is too dependent on prompts to be interesting LLMs take too much RAM to run effectively LLMs take too much electricity to run locally LLMs work locally but are a bit too slow for my taste LLMs output mostly correct code but it isn't applicable to my codebase LLMs make tool calls to pull in additional context LLMs outputted code work…
isn't this template supposed to mean that all the previous considerations are now obsolete?
The rest is no longer true, indeed
Re: The future of software development is software developers
#586> Edgar Dijkstra called it nearly 50 years ago: we will never be programming in English, or French, or Spanish. Natural languages have not evolved to be precise enough and unambiguous enough. Semantic ambiguity and language entropy will always defeat this ambition. This is the most important quote for any AI coding discussion. Anyone that doesn't understand how the tools they use came to be is doomed to reinvent them…
> These are the same people that create applications in MS Excel. Ones that want their application to work? :) the last piece of software you should be knocking is MS Excel, in my 30+ year career the one common thread just about everywhere I worked (or contracted at) has used Excel to run some amazing sh*t
This exactly the argument I try to make Excel (spreadsheets) is a great interface for processing and working with certain type of data, think economic etc. but it is not great for other things. There we need a different interface to efficiently communicate our intent. For example programming languages or even writing a novel would not work very well in a Excel sheet (though no doubt someone has attempted it).
Re: The future of software development is software developers
#587This time it actually is different. HN might not think so, but HN is really skewed towards more senior devs, so I think they're out of touch with what new grads are going through. It's awful.
What is it that new grads are going through? If you are referring to difficulty finding a job, keep in mind that there is both an economic downturn and an over-hiring correction happening in the industry right now. I imagine the AI industry is indeed having an impact in how management is behaving, but I would not yet bet on AI actually replacing developers jobs holistically.
Re: The future of software development is software developers
#588Earlier quoted context omitted.
The parent comment's point is that we _should_ care because cheap frontier-model access (that many of us have quickly become hopelessly dependent on) might be temporary.
It's amazing that anyone that has seen anything in technology in the last 30 years can say, "better be careful. They might stop subsidizing this and then it's gunna get expensive!" is ridiculous. I can buy a 1Tb flash drive for $100. Please, even with every reason to amortize the hardware over the longest horizon possible are only going out 6 years. 64K should be enough for anyone right?