[dusted]

No, you're historically wrong.

If AI makes engineers more productive, then it follows that the application of engineering become economically viable on whole new sets of problems. So AI is making engineers even more sought after.

That said, I'm so unimpressed with AI at the moment that I start thinking it's just a bubble, but even if it isen't, it's not going to lessen the need for engieers in the least.

[clbrmbr]

> then it follows that the application of engineering become economically viable on whole new sets of problems.

Agree.

The demand curve for highly skilled SWEs is incredibly robust but has been supply limited. Insofar as AI effectively upskills workers who were just below the demand cliff, this is a boon to workers.

The big shift I see is towards Quality. Implementation has gotten cheaper relative to problem specification and verification.

[zb3]

I don't see why these are mutually exclusive. The point is that those new "engineers" will not necessarily be the same people. Those "good" engineers will enjoy improved productivity and will be more sought after, while those "not so good" engineers will be replaced by AI. As always, any innovation just seems to increase inequality.

[dusted]

On the contrary, AI will _also_ create jobs for people who as of now would be unqualified for engineering.. People who have enough of the right type of thinking, but can't learn to code well enough to be productive, they can now be AI babysitters and integrators.