3 ms·

> ...most software engineers became engineers because they love writing code. Not managing code. Not reviewing code. Not supervising systems that produce code.

> ...most software engineers became engineers because they love writing code. Not managing code. Not reviewing code. Not supervising systems that produce code. Writing it... A SWE who bases their entire identity and career around only writing code is not an engineer - they are a code monkey. The entire point of hiring a Software ENGINEER is to help translate business requirements into technical requirements, and then implement the technical requirements into a tangible feature or product. The only reason companies buy software is because the alternative means building in-house, and for most industries software is a cost-center not a revenue generator. I don't pay (US specific) 200K-400K TCs for code monkeys, I pay that TC for Engineers. And this does a disservice to the large portion of SWEs and former SWEs (like me) who have been in the industry because we are customer-outcome driven (how do we use code to solve a tangible customer need) and not here to write pretty code.

gedy 8mo ago
You might be missing that a lot of companies are giddy that the mgmt can just vibe code stuff and there's no opportunity for engineers to be involved, (except for when it crashes?). I use AI tools and they are nice, but the mgmt are mostly not logical and need someone to sort through their bullshit.
- alephnerd 8mo ago
  Yeah no. Almost all companies I've chatted with - from MSPs to C-Suite of F10s - expect and demand humans-in-the-loop. I'm also on a couple boards and we've aligned on the same expectation as well. Look, AI/ML and especially LLMs are powerful, but there does remain a degree of instability and non-determinism which will require human intervention to remediate. That said, there is a lot of dev work in companies that is a cost-center, and those are the portions that will start getting vibe coded and deployed in product with little-to-no oversight (eg. a support portal for SMBs at an enterprise), but the equivalent feature would have already been an afterthought even without LLMs and probably given to a couple SWEs we'd be fine re-orging in a quarter anyhow.
  - gedy 8mo ago
    Yes just not driven or owned by engineers. That's what I'm seeing from company and a few peer's companies. > but there does remain a degree of instability and non-determinism which will require human intervention to remediate. I agree.
    - alephnerd 8mo ago
      > Yes just not driven or owned by engineers. That's what I'm seeing from company and a few peer's companies I mean, it depends on the feature/product and how critical it is to the health of the business. Like I mentioned in my edited comment, there is a lot of dev work in companies that is a cost-center, and those are the portions that will start getting vibe coded and deployed in product with little-to-no oversight (eg. a support portal for SMBs at an enterprise), but the equivalent feature would have already been an afterthought even without LLMs and probably given to a couple SWEs we'd be fine re-orging in a quarter anyhow because we cannot justify spending $500K-750K a year (the backend cost of 3 FT SWEs or Contractors for a company) on a customer form which nets $0 in revenue and is not directly tied with pipeline generation.
      - gedy 8mo ago
        We are probably talking past each other but I am saying I see: Leaders thinking they will basically prompt out new revenue generating features with no human engineers to "figure it out". Not cost centers, low hanging fruit, etc. No these are not giant corps like Google or whatever and likely run by morons, but it was easier when they did not think they were "empowered". There is no opportunity for engineers to "think in higher abstractions" or whatever in these cases.
        alephnerd 8mo ago
        > Leaders thinking they will basically prompt out new revenue generating features with no human engineers to "figure it out" Yeah and I'm telling you as one of those leaders that most of the leaders I am meeting with know this is unrealistic and non-tech enterprises. I think the issue is, a lot of SWEs think their work actually matters to the bottom line (and PMs and execs will massage their ego - I'm guilty of doing this as well) but in reality they don't matter because they are working in a cost-center product or feature. Every SWE on HN should sit down and ask themselves whether or not 1. The feature they are working on directly generates revenue for their employer. 2. If it does, does it generate revenue equivalent to at least 1% of overall revenue per year. 3. Whether the cost of your team of SWEs+PMs are putting the feature/product in the red (ie. If you are 3 Eng and 1 PM working on a product who's revenue is only $500K/yr). If all of those questions are negative, your product/feature is at risk from LLMs but was already at risk of being offshored.

gedy 8mo ago

You might be missing that a lot of companies are giddy that the mgmt can just vibe code stuff and there's no opportunity for engineers to be involved, (except for when it crashes?). I use AI tools and they are nice, but the mgmt are mostly not logical and need someone to sort through their bullshit.

alephnerd 8mo ago
Yeah no. Almost all companies I've chatted with - from MSPs to C-Suite of F10s - expect and demand humans-in-the-loop. I'm also on a couple boards and we've aligned on the same expectation as well. Look, AI/ML and especially LLMs are powerful, but there does remain a degree of instability and non-determinism which will require human intervention to remediate. That said, there is a lot of dev work in companies that is a cost-center, and those are the portions that will start getting vibe coded and deployed in product with little-to-no oversight (eg. a support portal for SMBs at an enterprise), but the equivalent feature would have already been an afterthought even without LLMs and probably given to a couple SWEs we'd be fine re-orging in a quarter anyhow.
- gedy 8mo ago
  Yes just not driven or owned by engineers. That's what I'm seeing from company and a few peer's companies. > but there does remain a degree of instability and non-determinism which will require human intervention to remediate. I agree.
  - alephnerd 8mo ago
    > Yes just not driven or owned by engineers. That's what I'm seeing from company and a few peer's companies I mean, it depends on the feature/product and how critical it is to the health of the business. Like I mentioned in my edited comment, there is a lot of dev work in companies that is a cost-center, and those are the portions that will start getting vibe coded and deployed in product with little-to-no oversight (eg. a support portal for SMBs at an enterprise), but the equivalent feature would have already been an afterthought even without LLMs and probably given to a couple SWEs we'd be fine re-orging in a quarter anyhow because we cannot justify spending $500K-750K a year (the backend cost of 3 FT SWEs or Contractors for a company) on a customer form which nets $0 in revenue and is not directly tied with pipeline generation.
    - gedy 8mo ago
      We are probably talking past each other but I am saying I see: Leaders thinking they will basically prompt out new revenue generating features with no human engineers to "figure it out". Not cost centers, low hanging fruit, etc. No these are not giant corps like Google or whatever and likely run by morons, but it was easier when they did not think they were "empowered". There is no opportunity for engineers to "think in higher abstractions" or whatever in these cases.
      - alephnerd 8mo ago
        > Leaders thinking they will basically prompt out new revenue generating features with no human engineers to "figure it out" Yeah and I'm telling you as one of those leaders that most of the leaders I am meeting with know this is unrealistic and non-tech enterprises. I think the issue is, a lot of SWEs think their work actually matters to the bottom line (and PMs and execs will massage their ego - I'm guilty of doing this as well) but in reality they don't matter because they are working in a cost-center product or feature. Every SWE on HN should sit down and ask themselves whether or not 1. The feature they are working on directly generates revenue for their employer. 2. If it does, does it generate revenue equivalent to at least 1% of overall revenue per year. 3. Whether the cost of your team of SWEs+PMs are putting the feature/product in the red (ie. If you are 3 Eng and 1 PM working on a product who's revenue is only $500K/yr). If all of those questions are negative, your product/feature is at risk from LLMs but was already at risk of being offshored.