3 ms·

> at best you can have AI doing 90% of the work as long as an expert developer is driving things. But that puts 90% of developers out of a job. And I don't s

by amelius 5mo ago

> at best you can have AI doing 90% of the work as long as an expert developer is driving things. But that puts 90% of developers out of a job. And I don't see why it couldn't become 99%.

poidos 5mo ago
It only puts 90% of developers out of a job if the demand for software stays flat.
- SecretDreams 5mo ago
  How much does the appetite for good* software need to grow to not have loss of jobs?
- aurareturn 5mo ago
  Exactly. I see software engineering going the way of accounting or lawyer. Every business needs an accountant and a lawyer on hand. In the past, hiring one software engineer to build custom software for your small or midsized business was not worth it. What can one software engineer build? Maybe an MVP in a year? No chance it was worth it for the vast majority of businesses. Outside of corporations or tech companies, employing a software dev was simply not a thing. Nowadays, your kindergarten might employ a full time or part time software engineer to build custom software. One dev can build a lot more a lot faster. That said, I think the average or below average dev won’t earn $200k/year anymore. However, the top devs will earn more than ever. If AI increases an average dev’s productivity by 10x, then it will increase a top tier dev’s by 100x.
  - euwuw 5mo ago
    “ However, the top devs will earn more than ever. ” No they won’t. Productivity does not determine the wage rate.
    - aurareturn 5mo ago
      It’s already happening. Top tier devs have two ways of earning way more than before: 1. They can build and sell their own products or services. We are already seeing 1-2 person software companies earning real money. Top devs don’t have to stay in corporate if they think they can generate more revenue on their own. 2. When companies get rid of their B devs without losing productivity, they can pay their A devs more. I’m in the #2 camp right now. My team shrank by 50% through attrition in the last year. We didn’t hire anyone new when someone left. My pay has increased.
      - euwuw 5mo ago
        [flagged]
        aurareturn 5mo ago
        I’m not desperate at all. It was my company who was desperate to keep me and gave me a huge pay rise. I was already making top tier money. I threatened to leave to start my own company unless they gave me enough money to make me not want to do it. They did.
        euwuw 5mo ago
        [flagged]
        cindyllm 5mo ago
        [dead]
        aurareturn 5mo ago
        Don't think I need pity from a random person on the internet. ;) Regardless, I didn't say "many". I said top tier. How you define that is up to you. There is already ample evidence for top dev talent earning way more than before whether it's through corporate or starting their own company.
        deleted 5mo ago
  - swid 5mo ago
    Because there is so much money for kindergarten teachers, paying an extra salary for a software dev for every kindergarten will certainly lead to better outcomes. The computer programs will make up for the lost teacher economically by teaching the children instead of people, raising the market share of my local kindergarten, or enticing people to have more babies. \s
  - vanuatu 5mo ago
    It's even better than accounting or lawyers, because good software engineers can build incredible businesses from scratch instead of being tied to the number of businesses that exist SWEs are more leveraged than ever and we've seen comp drastically rise for top performers
- the_af 5mo ago
  > It only puts 90% of developers out of a job if the demand for software stays flat. ...or if there's an increase of demand for software, but mostly of the kind that can be completely automated by AI, no need for developers.
JimDabell 5mo ago
No, you are ignoring my central point by assuming that the amount of software that is being produced remains fixed. Every other time we have increased software engineer productivity, we have responded by producing more software.
- pulse7 5mo ago
  So it's similar to "Andy and Bill's Law" [1]: "What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away". If Windows would stay the same (and not grow) it would be much faster on newer CPUs... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law
  - ranger_danger 5mo ago
    Interestingly, that link seems to say it was created for the opposite reason, that is, Intel was frustrated that Microsoft wasn't taking full advantage of their CPUs, not that bloat was steadily increasing.
- amelius 5mo ago
  Yes, it addresses your second point. I'm not saying your entire point is invalid, just that half of it is not correct, and so things might turn out worse than expected.
deleted 5mo ago
[deleted]

by amelius 5mo ago

> at best you can have AI doing 90% of the work as long as an expert developer is driving things. But that puts 90% of developers out of a job. And I don't see why it couldn't become 99%.

poidos 5mo ago

It only puts 90% of developers out of a job if the demand for software stays flat.

SecretDreams 5mo ago
How much does the appetite for good* software need to grow to not have loss of jobs?
aurareturn 5mo ago
Exactly. I see software engineering going the way of accounting or lawyer. Every business needs an accountant and a lawyer on hand. In the past, hiring one software engineer to build custom software for your small or midsized business was not worth it. What can one software engineer build? Maybe an MVP in a year? No chance it was worth it for the vast majority of businesses. Outside of corporations or tech companies, employing a software dev was simply not a thing. Nowadays, your kindergarten might employ a full time or part time software engineer to build custom software. One dev can build a lot more a lot faster. That said, I think the average or below average dev won’t earn $200k/year anymore. However, the top devs will earn more than ever. If AI increases an average dev’s productivity by 10x, then it will increase a top tier dev’s by 100x.
- euwuw 5mo ago
  “ However, the top devs will earn more than ever. ” No they won’t. Productivity does not determine the wage rate.
  - aurareturn 5mo ago
    It’s already happening. Top tier devs have two ways of earning way more than before: 1. They can build and sell their own products or services. We are already seeing 1-2 person software companies earning real money. Top devs don’t have to stay in corporate if they think they can generate more revenue on their own. 2. When companies get rid of their B devs without losing productivity, they can pay their A devs more. I’m in the #2 camp right now. My team shrank by 50% through attrition in the last year. We didn’t hire anyone new when someone left. My pay has increased.
    - euwuw 5mo ago
      [flagged]
      - aurareturn 5mo ago
        I’m not desperate at all. It was my company who was desperate to keep me and gave me a huge pay rise. I was already making top tier money. I threatened to leave to start my own company unless they gave me enough money to make me not want to do it. They did.
        euwuw 5mo ago
        [flagged]
        cindyllm 5mo ago
        [dead]
        aurareturn 5mo ago
        Don't think I need pity from a random person on the internet. ;) Regardless, I didn't say "many". I said top tier. How you define that is up to you. There is already ample evidence for top dev talent earning way more than before whether it's through corporate or starting their own company.
      - deleted 5mo ago
- swid 5mo ago
  Because there is so much money for kindergarten teachers, paying an extra salary for a software dev for every kindergarten will certainly lead to better outcomes. The computer programs will make up for the lost teacher economically by teaching the children instead of people, raising the market share of my local kindergarten, or enticing people to have more babies. \s
- vanuatu 5mo ago
  It's even better than accounting or lawyers, because good software engineers can build incredible businesses from scratch instead of being tied to the number of businesses that exist SWEs are more leveraged than ever and we've seen comp drastically rise for top performers
the_af 5mo ago
> It only puts 90% of developers out of a job if the demand for software stays flat. ...or if there's an increase of demand for software, but mostly of the kind that can be completely automated by AI, no need for developers.

JimDabell 5mo ago

No, you are ignoring my central point by assuming that the amount of software that is being produced remains fixed. Every other time we have increased software engineer productivity, we have responded by producing more software.

pulse7 5mo ago
So it's similar to "Andy and Bill's Law" [1]: "What Intel giveth, Microsoft taketh away". If Windows would stay the same (and not grow) it would be much faster on newer CPUs... [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Andy_and_Bill%27s_law
- ranger_danger 5mo ago
  Interestingly, that link seems to say it was created for the opposite reason, that is, Intel was frustrated that Microsoft wasn't taking full advantage of their CPUs, not that bloat was steadily increasing.
amelius 5mo ago
Yes, it addresses your second point. I'm not saying your entire point is invalid, just that half of it is not correct, and so things might turn out worse than expected.

deleted 5mo ago

[deleted]