3 ms·
> World will have lots more of apps, and programmers. This is actually bad for existing programmers though? Do you not see how this devalues your skills?
by bluefirebrand 1y ago
> World will have lots more of apps, and programmers.
This is actually bad for existing programmers though?
Do you not see how this devalues your skills?
- bitpush 1y agoIn the current state, yes. But that is also an opportunity, isn't it? When online flight bookings came about, travel agents were displaced. The solution isn't "let's stop online flight bookings sites and protect travel agents" because that's an inefficient system
- dijksterhuis 1y agoWhy does every system need to be efficient?
- hackernoops 1y agoFractional reserve lending, rehypothecation, etc.
- lupire 1y agoSorry to be that guy, but would to prefer if your computer and phone each cost $5000?
- tonyedgecombe 1y agoIn some ways I would, computing lost something once normal people were allowed in.
- dijksterhuis 1y ago> The solution isn't "let's stop online flight bookings sites and protect travel agents" because that's an inefficient system this is akin to the self-checkout aisles in supermarkets, some of which have been rolled back to add back in more human checkout staff. why? people liked interacting with the inefficient humans. turns out efficiency isn’t ideal in all cases. i wasn’t trying to argue that everything should be inefficient. i was trying to point out that not everything needs to be efficient. two very different things, and it seems (?) you may have thought i meant the former.
- amanaplanacanal 1y agoI know someone who will never use self-check, because he isn't getting paid to scan his own groceries. I, on the other hand, will use whichever gets me out of the store faster. I don't view shopping for groceries as a social occasion. I guess it takes all types.
- komali2 1y agoUnder capitalism, because greater margins. Under not-capitalism, so as to free up resources and labor for other things or just increase available downtime for people.
- Funes- 1y ago>Under capitalism, because greater margins Under capitalism, or late-stage capitalism, if you will, more efficient procedures aren't normally allowing for greater margins. There are countless examples of more exploitative and wasteful strategies yielding much greater margins than more efficient alternatives.
- platevoltage 1y agoI see your point, but I'm having personally having a different experience. A client of mine has gotten quite good at using Bolt and Lovable. He has since put me on 3 more projects that he dreamed up and vibe coded that would just be a figment of his imagination pre-AI. He knows what's involved in software development, and knows that he can't take it all the way with these tools.
- sarchertech 1y agoThere are far more programmers now than in 1980, yet the average programmer makes far more (inflation adjusted) now.
- kjkjadksj 1y agoThank the Bangalore office for that.
- FirmwareBurner 1y agoHow much online shopping could you do from your PC in 1980? How many people had smartphones in 1980? That's why sw devs salaries went up like crazy in our time and not in 1980. But what new tech will we have, that will push the SW dev market demand up like internet connected PCs and smartphones did? All I see is stagnation in the near future, just maintaining or rewriting the existing shit that we have, not expanding into new markets.
- WJW 1y agoMaintaining and rewriting existing shit is quite well paying though, and also something that AI seems to struggle with. (Funnily enough, AI seems to struggles even more with refactoring vibecoded projects than with refactoring human-written apps. What that says about the quality of the vibe coded code I don't know.)
- FirmwareBurner 1y agoTech salaries grew because beyond rewriting and maintaining shit, even more new shit was being built from scratch. How will the job market look like when it's all rewriting and maintaining the existing shit?
- Funes- 1y agoAnd the quality of what they develop is in the gutter, on average.
- 1y ago