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

Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

defragzone.substack.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 886 posts

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#81

Post by bloomingkales »

yodsanklai wrote: post #42
bloomingkales wrote: post #29

I'm sure there is a formal proof someone can flesh out. - Half assed developer can construct a functional program with AI prompts. - Deployed at scale for profit - Many considerations were not considered due to lack of expertise (security, for example) - Bad things happen for users. I have at least two or three ideas that I've canned for now because it's just not safe for users (AI apps of that type require a lot of…

Why half-assed developer? It could be high-level developer that take advantage of AI to be more productive. This will reduce team sizes.

I don't think we have enough data to see if it will reduce team size in the long run (can't believe I just said such an obvious thing). You may get a revolving door, similar to what we've had in tech in the last decade. Developers come into a startup and cook up a greenfield project. Then they leave, and the company waits until the next feature/revamp to bring the next crop of developers in. There will be some attempt at making AI handle the maintenance of the code, but I suspect it will be a quagmire. Won't stop companies from trying though.

Basically, you will have a dynamic team size, not necessarily a smaller team size.

The "half-assed" part is most likely a by-product of my self-loathing. I suspect the better word would have been "human".

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#83

Post by MonkeyClub »

EVa5I7bHFq9mnYK wrote: post #13

I remember very uplifted talk here a few years ago about firing truck and taxi drivers for AI. Turned out, programmers are easier to replace :)

Taxi driving is an antifragile profession apparently, to a degree that computer programming could only aspire to.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#84

Post by batuhandumani »

uludag wrote: post #68
batuhandumani wrote: post #28

Such writings, articles, and sayings remind me of the Luddite movement. Unfortunately, preventing what is to come is not within our control. By fighting against windmills, one only bends the spear in hand. The Zeitgeist indicates that this will happen soon or in the near future. Even though developers are intelligent, hardworking, and good at their jobs, they will always be lacking and helpless in some way against th…

> Unfortunately, preventing what is to come is not within our control. > it is necessary to focus on the following more important concept: So, what will happen next? These two statements seem contradictory. These kinds of propositions always left me wondering where they come from. Viewing the universe as deterministic, yeah, I see how "preventing what is to come is not within our control" could be a true statement. B…

The concepts of "preventing what is to come is not within our control" and "So, what will happen next?" do not philosophically contradict each other. Furthermore, what I am referring to here is not necessarily related to determinism.

The question "What will happen next?" implies that something may have already happened now, but in the next step, different things will unfold. Preventing certain outcomes is difficult because knowledge does not belong to a single entity. Even if one manages to block something on a local scale, events will continue to unfold at a broader level.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#85

Post by bryukh »

isakkeyten wrote: post #63
bryukh wrote: post #3

"Let AI replace programmers" is the new "Let’s outsource everything to ." Short-term cost savings, long-term disaster.

[flagged]

> So no other country in the world can write code as good as wherever you are from?

I didn't say this -- I think it's your take. Even more -- I'm such an "outsource" software developer who is working for US and EU companies. My take is that overusing outsourcing in the long term, you can lose local education because "we can just hire from ... so why do we need to teach ours?" -- I saw it already, even on an "in-country-scale" level.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#86

Post by Draiken »

netcan wrote: post #67

Our ability to predict technological "replacement" is pretty shoddy. Take banking for example. ATMs are literally called "teller machines." Internet banking is a way of "automating banking." Besides those, every administrative aspect of banking went from paper to computer. Do banks employ fewer people? Is it a smaller industry? No. Banks grew steadily over these decades. It's actually shocking how little network enab…

Yes banks employ less people. In my country there are now account managers handling hundreds of clients virtually. Most of the local managers got fired.

I find it easy to say from our privileged position that "tech might replace workers but it'll be fine".

Even if all the replaced people aren't unemployed, salaries go down and standards of living for them fall off a cliff.

Tech innovation destroys lives in our current capitalist society because only the owners get the benefits. That's always been true.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#87

Post by Nullabillity »

ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #75
Nullabillity wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This is like arguing that surely we can get rid of all our formers as soon as we have a widespread enough caste of priests. There is no such thing as "prompt engineering ", because there is no formal logic to be understood or engineered into submission. That's just not how it works.

I remember saying the same about higher-level languages. Discipline can be applied to any endeavor.

Higher-level languages still operate according to defined rules and logic, even if we can sometimes disagree with those rules, and it still takes time to learn the implications of those rules.

AI prompts.. do not. It's fundamentally just not how the technology works.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#88

Post by aitchnyu »

Tangential, does AI pick up new knowledge of new tools? AI helped me write much better bash since there is tons of content by volunteers and less across-country animosity. Svelte and Fastapi were made/popularized this decade and people dont want to help their AI/offshore replacements with content. Will current AI get good at them?

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#89

Post by ChrisMarshallNY »

Nullabillity wrote: post #87
ChrisMarshallNY wrote: post #75

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember saying the same about higher-level languages. Discipline can be applied to any endeavor.

Higher-level languages still operate according to defined rules and logic, even if we can sometimes disagree with those rules, and it still takes time to learn the implications of those rules. AI prompts.. do not. It's fundamentally just not how the technology works.

Time will tell.

I still believe that we can approach even the most chaotic conditions, with a disciplined strategy. I’ve seen it happen, many times.

Re: Firing programmers for AI is a mistake

#90

Post by nirui »

Maybe it's just me boomer reading this, but I think all 3 points listed in the article are more of predictions from the author (with rationals from the author). However, AI today maybe different compare to AI in the future.

I'm a programmer, I love my skills, but I really hate to write code (and test etc etc), I don't even want to do system design. If I can just say to a computer "Hey, I got this 55TB change set and I want to synced it up with these listed nodes, data across all node must remain atomicity consistent before, during and after the sync. Now, you make it happen. Also, go pick up my dog from the vax", and then the computer just do that in the best way possible, I'll love it.

Fundamentally, programmer are tool creators. If it is possible that a computer can create better tools all by itself, then it looked unwise to just react such technology with emotional rejection.

I mean, the worries is real, sure, but I wouldn't just blank out reject the tech.

Post reply on HN