> What I'm saying is that it's a non-issue for customers if software has good engineering or not, if it fulfills their needs at a price they can pay. You think

> What I'm saying is that it's a non-issue for customers if software has good engineering or not, if it fulfills their needs at a price they can pay. You think that good engineering is unrelated to fulfilling needs at a price they pay? I think you're confused. Software engineers are tasked with exactly this problem - determining how to deliver utility at a price point. That's... the whole job. We consider how much it costs to run a database, how to target hardware constraints, how to build software that will scale accordingly as new features are added or new users onboard, etc. That's the job... That's sort of the whole point of the article. The job isn't "write code", which is what AI does. The job is "understand the customer, understand technology, figure out how to match customer expectations, business constraints, and technologies together in a way that can be maintained at-cost". > While human programmers are unwilling to provide this software for even a high price. Sorry, but this is just you whining that people didn't want to work for you. Software engineers obviously are willing to provide software in exchange for money, hence... idk, everyone's jobs. > And AI code will serve that field. That may be true, just as no-code solutions have done in the past. > Software engineers like you are the people who can best exploit this market segment, probably by leveraging these new AI tools. Yes, I agree. > Otherwise more and more people will do like me and have AI make their own bespoke solutions. I'm a bit skeptical of this broadly in the long term but it's certainly the case that some portion of the market will be served by this approach.