4 ms·
>By which I mean, we should -- as software engineers -- be insisting on tools that put us in the driver's seat more. And the company says "fuck you then, I'll
by coldtea 5mo ago
>By which I mean, we should -- as software engineers -- be insisting on tools that put us in the driver's seat more.
And the company says "fuck you then, I'll fire you, and keep fewer coders, willing to keep the AI dance".
The role of AI as a tech is to put you out of the drivers seat as much as possible. All the way to job elimination.
Solution?
- cmrdporcupine 5mo agoAnd by doing that said companies are devaluing their own IP and creating an organizational knowledge debt. Companies that work that way will in long run get outcompeted by shops that figure out (I don't know how) how to manage this better.
- coldtea 5mo agoWhat's worse, companies might be fine with "devaluing their own IP", since companies are not deciding, execs are. And those execs will get their bonuses anyway, and will be drinking their champagne far away from their executive roles and the company by the time that's felt.
- My_Name 5mo agoI think the opposite, as agents approach human levels of coding and multiple agents work together as a team to code, and check that code in an adversarial manner, companies that do not adopt them will put out less code, of lower quality, for far more money. There is no mitigation for that situation which would allow human coders to retain their place in the ecosystem. A man can dig a ditch in a week for £500. 7 men can dig a ditch in a day for £700. 1 man and a digger can dig a ditch in a day for £250. "But I use knowledge and my brain to do my job, my job is special!" Not any more it isn't...