nialse 8 days ago

Ahh, the “don’t disturb the status quo” argument. See, we are all working on our replacement, newer versions, products, services and knowledge always make the older obsolete. It is wise to work on your replacement, and even wiser to be in charge of and operate the replacement.

2
bgwalter 8 days ago

No, nothing fundamentally new is created. Programmers have always been obsessed with "new" tooling and processes to distract from that fact.

"AI" is the latest iteration of snake oil that is foisted upon us by management. The problem is not "AI" per se, but the amount of of friction and productivity loss that comes with it.

Most of the productivity loss comes from being forced to engage with it and push back against that nonsense. One has to learn the hype language, debunk it, etc.

Why do you think IT has gotten better? Amazon had a better and faster website with far better search and products 20 years ago. No amount of "AI" will fix that.

nialse 7 days ago

Maybe I would be useful to zoom out a bit. We're in a time of technological change, and change its gonna. Maybe it isn't your job that will change, maybe it is? Maybe it's not even about you or what you do. More likely it's the processes that will change around you. Maybe it's not change for better or worse. Maybe it's just change. But it's gonna change.

palmotea 7 days ago

> It is wise to work on your replacement...

Depends on the context. You have to keep in mind: it is not a goal of our society or economic system to provide you with a stable, rewarding job. In fact, the incentives are to take that away from you ASAP.

Before software engineers go celebrate this tech, they need realize they're going to end up like rust-belt factory workers the day after the plant closed. They're not special, and society won't be any kinder to them.

> ...and even wiser to be in charge of and operate the replacement.

You'll likely only get to do that if your boss doesn't know about it.

9dev 7 days ago

Speak for your own society, then. It should absolutely be our shared goal to keep as many people in stable, rewarding employment; if not for compassion, then at least pure egoism—it’s a lot more interesting to be surrounded by happy, educated people than an angry, poor mob.

Don’t let cynics rule your country. Go vote. There’s no rule that things have to stay awful.

davidcbc 7 days ago

Sure, but maybe we should do this before we make our own replacements. They aren't going to do it for us after the fact

nialse 7 days ago

> You have to keep in mind: it is not a goal of our society or economic system to provide you with a stable, rewarding job. In fact, the incentives are to take that away from you ASAP.

We seem to agree as this is more or less exactly the my point. Striving to keep the status quo is a futile path. Eventually things change. Be ready. The best advice I've ever got work (and maybe even life) wise is to always have alternatives. If you don't have alternatives, you literally have no choice.

palmotea 7 days ago

> We seem to agree as this is more or less exactly the my point. Striving to keep the status quo is a futile path. Eventually things change. Be ready. The best advice I've ever got work (and maybe even life) wise is to always have alternatives. If you don't have alternatives, you literally have no choice.

Those alternatives are going to be worse for you, because if they weren't, why didn't you switch already? And if a flood of your peers are pursing alternatives at the same time, you'll probably experience an even poorer outcome than you expected (e.g. everyone getting laid off and trying to make ends meet driving for Uber at the same time). Then, AI is really properly understood as a "fuck the white-collar middle-class" tech, and it's probably going to fuck up your backup plans at about the same time as it fucks up your status quo.

You're also describing a highly individualistic strategy, for someone acting on his own. At this point, the correct strategy is probably collective action, which can at least delay and control the change to something more manageable. But software engineers have been too "special snowflake" about themselves to have laid the groundwork for that, and are acutely vulnerable.

nialse 7 days ago

Alternatives need not be better or worse. Just different. Alternatives need not be doing the same thing somewhere else, it might be seeking out something else to do where you are. It might be selling all your stuff and live on an island in the sun for all I know.

I do concur it is an individualistic strategy, and as you mentioned unionization might have helped. But, then again it might not. Developers are partially unionized where I live, and I'm not so sure it's going to help. It might absorb some of the impact. Let's see in a couple of years.

palmotea 7 days ago

> Alternatives need not be better or worse. Just different. Alternatives need [not] be doing the same thing somewhere else, it might be seeking out something else to do where you are.

People have families to feed and lifestyles to maintain, anything that's not equivalent will introduce hardship. And "different" most likely means worse, when it comes to compensation. Even a successful career change usually means restarting at the bottom of the ladder.

And what's that "something else," exactly? You need to consider that may be disrupted at the same time you're planning on seeking it, or fierce competition from your peers makes it unobtainable to you.

Assuming there are alternatives waiting for you when you'll need them is its own kind of complacency.

> It might be selling all your stuff and live on an island in the sun for all I know.

Yeah, people with the "fuck-you" money to do that will probably be fine. Most people don't have that, though.

nialse 7 days ago

Being ahead of the curve is a recipe for not being left behind. There is no better time for action than now. And regarding the competition from peers, the key is likely differentiation. As it always has been.

Hardship or not, restarting from the bottom of the ladder or not, betting on status quo is a loosing game at the moment. Software development is being disrupted, I would expect developers to produce 2-4x more now than two years ago. However, that is the pure dev work. The architecture, engineering, requirements, specification etc parts will likely see another trajectory. Much due to the raise of automation in dev and other parts of the company. The flip side is that the raise of non-dev automation is coming, with the possibility of automating other tasks, in turn making engineers (maybe not devs though) vital to the companies process change.

Another, semi related, thought is that software development has automated away millions of jobs and it’s just developers time to be on the other end of the stick.