The difference between writing assembly code and Ruby code is much smaller than the difference between programming and vibe coding.
Also, companies are pressuring employees towards adoption in novel ways. There was no such industry-wide pressure by employers in the 90s, 2000s or 2010s for engineers to use a specific tech.
> Also, companies are pressuring employees towards adoption in novel ways. There was no such industry-wide pressure by employers in the 90s, 2000s or 2010s for engineers to use a specific tech.
Companies have been enforcing technology mandates since time immemorial. In the early 2000s there were definitely a lot of mandates to move away from commercial UNIX to Linux. Lots of companies began enforcing the switch to PHP, Ruby and Python for new projects.
Yes, but the entire industry was not pushing any one single tool at the same time. If you disliked Django, you could go to Rails. If you disliked Rails, you had Phoenix. Etc.
Or, it could be like asbestos and the immediate benefits are just too appealing to listen to arguments of skeptical naysayers about some vaguely defined problems that are decades away, if they even happen.
I use AI tools daily (because they feel like they're helping me)
but it's not exactly hard to imagine scenarios where an explosion of slop piling up plus harm to learning by outsourcing all thinking results in systemic damage that actually slows the pace of technological progress given enough time.
History of new technologies tend to average into a positive trend over a long enough time scale but that doesn't mean there aren't individual ups and downs. Including WTF moments looking back at what now seems like baffling decision-making with benefit of hindsight.
Some of us are already experiencing that. For example I handed off an initial version of something some months ago, and the AI-generated stuff they came up with was a huge buggy mess of spaghetti code neither of us understood. Months later we've detangled it, cutting it down to a third the size, making it far simpler to understand, and fixing several bugs in the process (one was even by accident, we'd made note of it, then later when we went to fix it, it was already fixed).
If it is, the fall out will be way worse than if AI ends up living up to (reasonable) expectations.
If it doesn’t, we are going to see over a trillion dollars of capital leave the tech sector, which I think will have worse impacts on the livelihood of tech workers than if AI ends up panning out.
This is something the naysayers need to grapple with. We’ve crossed a line where this tech needs to work simply because of the amount of money depending on that fact.
> If it doesn’t, we are going to see over a trillion dollars of capital leave the tech sector, which I think will have worse impacts on the livelihood of tech workers than if AI ends up panning out.
I don't think it will be worse; if AI pans out the world would be able to continue without a single programmer left. If a trillion dollars leave the tech sector, all those programmers employed outside of the tech sector will still have jobs.
The asbestos hypothetical is a bit different than the "bubble popping" economic crisis scenario though. In this world, AI would just continue being adopted and shoved into every nook and cranny into which it can be made to fit, with valuations only getting bigger and bigger.
The damage would come much later, well beyond the point where it could be simply pulled out and replaced without spending massive amounts of money and would also basically necessitate training an entire new generation of engineers.
Then the AI giants would start appearing vulnerable like cigarette companies in the 90s while an AI Superfund and interstate class action are being planned but Sam Altman would already be a centitrillionaire at that point so it would be someone else's problem.
It seems like a lot of developers have philosophical disagreements with the direction of AI combined with fear of change and fear that AI makes them less competitive in the job market. I see people regularly boycotting or rejecting AI for a variation of these reasons, and it feels a lot like self-sabotage.
My biggest challenge is to look productive while still having some time and focus left to be a good expert. After all - we are just code reviewers now, and you are a no good reviewer if you never get any shovel time yourself.
The juniors are eliminated and the seniors indulge in cognitive surrender because it feels good.
For anyone that asks how you are doing, answer honestly! Or with something slightly unexpected or easy for the other person to engage with or laugh at.
“Hi, How are you?”
“Well I woke up this morning and stepped on my dog’s tail by accident. He was not happy with me, but we’re all good now - how about you?”
The issue for me is that I seem to really "page out" parts of my life that aren't relevant to the situation I'm in. If I were to sincerely answer the "how are you" question, I would have to pause for ten or twenty seconds to think about how I am, which obviously doesn't fit the interaction. Any tips on how to avoid this? I'm a chronic over-preparer and I've tried to equip myself with answers to every conceivable question and that's just exhausting, so I've wanted to avoid that.
I think the answer is practice, for a few reasons. One is obvious: conversation is a skill. Just like a novice chess player can spend 5 seconds figuring out which squares the knight can move to while an intermediate player spots a fork to force trading a strong bishop or exposing an overworked queen, exposure to similar situations rewires your brain to work faster in those situations.
Another reason, though, is to me one of the main benefits of social interaction in the first place: The brain rewiring also makes you think about what other people would think, want to hear, say to you, etc, even when they're not around. That sure can give you better answers in conversations, but more importantly, I think this is just genuinely a nice way for the brain to be. In the same way that dogs are happy playing fetch, humans are happy living with other people in mind. Maybe because it feels like not everything is your responsibility, or that you worry less about what you should be doing, or that you look forward to laughing about disasters later... I'm not entirely sure. Whatever it is, it's nicer than the alternative.
I may suggest to answer genuinely about how you are instead of "how is life" — yes, my life is hard because of many ongoing family health issues, but I might still be OK in the moment. Or sleepy from a bad night of sleep, or hungry because I skipped breakfast. Or happy because I got my favourite parking spot. Or had a nice meal....
Say "I'm about to have coffee, so that's good :-) "
Alternately, instead of trying to prepare for every possible answer, you can constrain the possible replies significantly by being the one who asks the question in the first place. "How's your day going?" is only ever going to get some variation of "good" or "bad". You only need to respond with "great to hear that", or "sorrt to hear that, hope it improves soon". That's it.
Great advice but that may not always work in Ireland. The expected answer is “grand” or something similarly neutral and succinct. The asker may not even stop to listen to your answer so you won’t have enough time to provide a decent response.
Your suggestion would work when both people are in the same place for some time, e.g., waiting in line for a coffee, or for a meeting to start or for a lift (elevator) to arrive, etc.
I sometimes go to concerts by myself and like to arrive early to catch the support act. There’s usually a gap of at least half an hour before the main act comes on stage and I make a point of looking around for other people who aren’t on their phone so I can start a conversation. In that situation, I already know we have something in common.
I watched that interview live this AM and was so confused. The CEO looked annoyed and pissed the entire interview. Kept answering questions with “it’s on our website [awkward silence]”
It almost seemed like he was incredibly hung over and didn’t sleep last night.
But I got the feeling he was being a jerk on purpose. Still don’t understand why though.
USPS is the only storefront I can think of that allows you to walk in, grab an unlimited amount of boxes/supplies, and walk out with no questions asked.
They will even deliver boxes to your front door, for free, by simply submitting a form online.
It's so easy, I'm not at all surprised that it's occasionally abused.
IIRC the model was closer to a freemium model where you would get free internet to approved websites (including Facebook) with the ability to access the entire internet for an extra fee.
Facebook and approved sites wouldn’t count towards your mobile bandwidth quota, but the rest of the internet does and requires a data plan.
reply