4 ms·

My sense is that the doomers in software these days are either inexperienced and lack perspective from industry shifts over the years or weren't very good to be

by ugh123 3y ago

My sense is that the doomers in software these days are either inexperienced and lack perspective from industry shifts over the years or weren't very good to begin with and could not build beyond basic crud and data shipping applications of varying complexity.

reactordev 3y ago
3rd option. They got complacent and old and have trouble learning (don’t realize it) and can’t grok the new medium.
- happytiger 3y ago
  That seems possible. There is a frequent bias against the new even in progressive technology circles.
  - reactordev 3y ago
    yeah, I wasn't referring to agism or anything like that. Just that they had been there a while, got complacent with the code base or the style of programming. That's all. It can take an entire mind shift to understand what's going on when all you've been building is administrative portals and internal sites.
- ikari_pl 3y ago
  4th option. They're trying to enter the market and get a good job, but some companies consider them less experienced but more expensive than Copilot.
  - happytiger 3y ago
    Fewer but more senior resources seems possible. I have already seen the impact of AI systems, reducing the number of junior coding positions and outsourcing. On the other hand, anyone who actually takes the time to get good with AI coding tools can be performing at senior levels, much more quickly, so there’s that too. I’m not convinced that it’s some kind of apocalypse as much as it is a massive shift that is going to raise all boats and bring about a renaissance of productivity, and incredibly massive amounts of code, which hopefully is a higher quality because there’s no longer written by an individual in isolation but by a team of software engineers working in concert with AI. I can’t tell you number times where people were screaming and yelling about how coding was coming to an end and everyone was going to be unemployed in a few years —yet here we are…
    - ugh123 3y ago
      Agreed. The only thing to come true in the last decade about the death of software engineering from no/low-code systems is that there were more software jobs created to build no/low-code systems. Also see "death of the sys admin by way of AWS and the like"
      - happytiger 3y ago
        I remember when AWS was going to kill sysadmins. Instead it changed what the career meant really. Systems Administration work seems like it’s in a constant state of change anyways. Honestly that whole transformation from datacenter operator to what it is now (all the things!) is such an interesting parallel to what is happening now with general software engineering.
        ugh123 3y ago
        From your observation it seems the parallel to sysadmin -> multi faceted devops is software eng -> something close to "true full stack software and product implementation + possibly design" work. Wild.
    - jon-wood 3y ago
      I keep seeing this argument for a bunch of different industries. Nobody appears to have an answer for where all these more senior people are going to come from when we're replacing the juniors with an LLM. People don't magically become senior engineers, they need to get experience of the basics. Traditionally that's done by being hired as a junior engineer and doing a few years of fairly dull work under the supervision of the more senior engineers, who gradually prod you into doing things well. Bootcamps have been somewhat filling the ever increasing void for junior positions to some extent (in the process making the barrier to entry into the industry higher for people who can't afford to literally pay for the junior roles that used to pay them), but there's still a chasm between someone fresh out of a bootcamp program and a developer who you can let loose on a project unsupervised.
    - 2devnull 3y ago
      > get good with AI coding tools can be performing at senior levels No. They are orthogonal modes of thinking. That said, getting good at prompting LLM is already making people better communicators. That will be a big benefit to seniors as they can use their prompting skills to direct junior staff more efficiently. But better at thinking about the trade offs that senior devs need to think about, nope.
  - reactordev 3y ago
    ooo, that's a good point too. In this case, wouldn't the coder be more productive if given a Copilot?
girvo 3y ago
I mean most people in most jobs are average, or below. Programmers aren't immune: most of them are bad at their jobs on aggregate. Of course they can be replaced by LLM output: their output is already half broken too. I'm only slightly exaggerating for effect, but it's been 17 years for me in this industry and I've seen that over and over again.
aleph_minus_one 3y ago
> My sense is that the doomers in software these days are either inexperienced and lack perspective from industry shifts over the years or weren't very good to begin with and could not build beyond basic crud and data shipping applications of varying complexity. My experience rather is that such people often (though not always) are quite good programmers, but came to a different conclusion on how it makes sense to develop software than the direction which the industry shifted to (and often have good, though sometimes non-mainstream reasons for their opinions). Thus, despite being good programmers, "they fell out fashion" with "how you are (by today's fashion/hype) supposed to build software on this current day". So, they became more and more hard to employ and thus more and more frustrated (just to be clear: in my experience they are often quite right in their opinions).

by ugh123 3y ago

reactordev 3y ago

3rd option. They got complacent and old and have trouble learning (don’t realize it) and can’t grok the new medium.

happytiger 3y ago
That seems possible. There is a frequent bias against the new even in progressive technology circles.
- reactordev 3y ago
  yeah, I wasn't referring to agism or anything like that. Just that they had been there a while, got complacent with the code base or the style of programming. That's all. It can take an entire mind shift to understand what's going on when all you've been building is administrative portals and internal sites.
ikari_pl 3y ago
4th option. They're trying to enter the market and get a good job, but some companies consider them less experienced but more expensive than Copilot.
- happytiger 3y ago
  Fewer but more senior resources seems possible. I have already seen the impact of AI systems, reducing the number of junior coding positions and outsourcing. On the other hand, anyone who actually takes the time to get good with AI coding tools can be performing at senior levels, much more quickly, so there’s that too. I’m not convinced that it’s some kind of apocalypse as much as it is a massive shift that is going to raise all boats and bring about a renaissance of productivity, and incredibly massive amounts of code, which hopefully is a higher quality because there’s no longer written by an individual in isolation but by a team of software engineers working in concert with AI. I can’t tell you number times where people were screaming and yelling about how coding was coming to an end and everyone was going to be unemployed in a few years —yet here we are…
  - ugh123 3y ago
    Agreed. The only thing to come true in the last decade about the death of software engineering from no/low-code systems is that there were more software jobs created to build no/low-code systems. Also see "death of the sys admin by way of AWS and the like"
    - happytiger 3y ago
      I remember when AWS was going to kill sysadmins. Instead it changed what the career meant really. Systems Administration work seems like it’s in a constant state of change anyways. Honestly that whole transformation from datacenter operator to what it is now (all the things!) is such an interesting parallel to what is happening now with general software engineering.
      - ugh123 3y ago
        From your observation it seems the parallel to sysadmin -> multi faceted devops is software eng -> something close to "true full stack software and product implementation + possibly design" work. Wild.
  - jon-wood 3y ago
    I keep seeing this argument for a bunch of different industries. Nobody appears to have an answer for where all these more senior people are going to come from when we're replacing the juniors with an LLM. People don't magically become senior engineers, they need to get experience of the basics. Traditionally that's done by being hired as a junior engineer and doing a few years of fairly dull work under the supervision of the more senior engineers, who gradually prod you into doing things well. Bootcamps have been somewhat filling the ever increasing void for junior positions to some extent (in the process making the barrier to entry into the industry higher for people who can't afford to literally pay for the junior roles that used to pay them), but there's still a chasm between someone fresh out of a bootcamp program and a developer who you can let loose on a project unsupervised.
  - 2devnull 3y ago
    > get good with AI coding tools can be performing at senior levels No. They are orthogonal modes of thinking. That said, getting good at prompting LLM is already making people better communicators. That will be a big benefit to seniors as they can use their prompting skills to direct junior staff more efficiently. But better at thinking about the trade offs that senior devs need to think about, nope.
- reactordev 3y ago
  ooo, that's a good point too. In this case, wouldn't the coder be more productive if given a Copilot?

girvo 3y ago

I mean most people in most jobs are average, or below. Programmers aren't immune: most of them are bad at their jobs on aggregate. Of course they can be replaced by LLM output: their output is already half broken too. I'm only slightly exaggerating for effect, but it's been 17 years for me in this industry and I've seen that over and over again.

aleph_minus_one 3y ago

> My sense is that the doomers in software these days are either inexperienced and lack perspective from industry shifts over the years or weren't very good to begin with and could not build beyond basic crud and data shipping applications of varying complexity. My experience rather is that such people often (though not always) are quite good programmers, but came to a different conclusion on how it makes sense to develop software than the direction which the industry shifted to (and often have good, though sometimes non-mainstream reasons for their opinions). Thus, despite being good programmers, "they fell out fashion" with "how you are (by today's fashion/hype) supposed to build software on this current day". So, they became more and more hard to employ and thus more and more frustrated (just to be clear: in my experience they are often quite right in their opinions).