Ahh, yes, the talk of the time. I will keep this short, yes what if it does replace software engineers? Then what? There was a time when we had no software engineers or even webmasters, those who are old enough to remember that term. We don't know what we don't know, yet we can assume that our skills are transferable and can differentiate into new roles. In the last few months, I even questioned whether software engineers should be utilized in certain roles like legacy systems integrations, which led me to come up with a new role, software archaeologists, more suitable and with the proper skillset to align with the problem. Here are some of my findings within this post: https://thevelocitymultiplier.substack.com/p/stop-paying-dow...
I think we need to have an open mind for two things: Are we caught up more in the title or the work that needs to be done, and do I have the capacity to re-imagine how my skills can differentiate into new roles?
I think those are valid points, and to further add to it, we'll see a bifurcation of what are currently called "software engineers"; those who adopt the technology because they consider it a craft, and those who fall behind by producing slop because they're just trying to leave for the day.
I agree with your statement. I'll leave with this: slop was there before AI got on the scene. We're discussing work culture, where the bare minimum is the way to the top, and the organization hires and allows that level of work. AI is just masking our own issues within a organization.
AI is just a tool. A power saw lets carpenters build more easily and so does AI, until you have to pay the real price of it and then its a 747 that hardly anyone can afford.
Ahh, yes, the talk of the time. I will keep this short, yes what if it does replace software engineers? Then what? There was a time when we had no software engineers or even webmasters, those who are old enough to remember that term. We don't know what we don't know, yet we can assume that our skills are transferable and can differentiate into new roles. In the last few months, I even questioned whether software engineers should be utilized in certain roles like legacy systems integrations, which led me to come up with a new role, software archaeologists, more suitable and with the proper skillset to align with the problem. Here are some of my findings within this post: https://thevelocitymultiplier.substack.com/p/stop-paying-dow...
I think we need to have an open mind for two things: Are we caught up more in the title or the work that needs to be done, and do I have the capacity to re-imagine how my skills can differentiate into new roles?
I think those are valid points, and to further add to it, we'll see a bifurcation of what are currently called "software engineers"; those who adopt the technology because they consider it a craft, and those who fall behind by producing slop because they're just trying to leave for the day.
I agree with your statement. I'll leave with this: slop was there before AI got on the scene. We're discussing work culture, where the bare minimum is the way to the top, and the organization hires and allows that level of work. AI is just masking our own issues within a organization.
AI is just a tool. A power saw lets carpenters build more easily and so does AI, until you have to pay the real price of it and then its a 747 that hardly anyone can afford.