5 ms·
You have a point, all people do like to think they're more irreplaceable than they are, but the last round of offshoring of programmers did in fact end up with
by rossdavidh 2y ago
You have a point, all people do like to think they're more irreplaceable than they are, but the last round of offshoring of programmers did in fact end up with the companies trying to reverse course a few years later. GM was the most well-known example of this, but I worked at several organizations that found that getting software done on the other side of the planet was a bad idea, and ended up having to reverse course.
The core issue is that the bottleneck step in software development isn't actually the ability to program a specific thing, it's the process of discovering what it is we actually want the program to do. Having your programmers AT THE OFFICE and in close communication with the people who need the software, is the best way to get that done. Having them on the other side of the planet turned out to be the worse way.
This is unintuitive (to programmers as well as the organizations that might employ them), and therefore they have to discover it the hard way. I don't think this is something LLMs will be good at, now or ever. There may come a day when neural networks (or some other ML) will be able to do that, but that day is not near.