3 ms·
> I dont think making Copilot better by handling its bad ouput means replacing developers The blog post goes through more than what I mentioned in my comment.
by diggan 2y ago
> I dont think making Copilot better by handling its bad ouput means replacing developers
The blog post goes through more than what I mentioned in my comment. For example:
> When the product we are building under the codename Project Padawan ships later this year, it will allow you to directly assign issues to GitHub Copilot, using any of the GitHub clients, and have it produce fully tested pull requests. Once a task is finished, Copilot will assign human reviewers to the PR, and work to resolve feedback they add.
How is that not trying to replace at least a small section of junior/boilerplate developers?
The developer might be the one who listens to the product team, maybe even creates the issue and finally reviews the code before it gets merged. But I'm having a hard time imagining the flow above as "Pair programming" or a developer working with a "co-pilot", as they're trying to say it's all about.
- scarface_74 2y ago> How is that not trying to replace at least a small section of junior/boilerplate developers? This was a danger before AI ever became a thing. If that’s all someone is doing, there was always a danger of being outsourced to someone who would work for less than you would. And today in 2025, ignoring AI, there are thousands of generic framework developers struggling to get a job because every job they apply to has thousands of applications and companies can choose any good enough developer. It was always hard to break the can’t get a job <-> don’t have experience cycle. Now it’s going to be harder. The solution at least for awhile is to run closer to the customer/stakeholder.