|
|
|
|
|
|
by andyferris
1177 days ago
|
|
|
I think the implication was meant to be that there will be far more people who are both programmers and domain experts than there currently are programmers? Domain experts often don't need to do anything "innovative" - they just want to schedule their team's workload or some-such that's been done a million times but the details of their particular situation are important. Most programmers now are doing such things for domain experts as it is. One possibility (I'm not 100% convinced) is that AI would allow the domain expert to do it directly, i.e. become a programmer themselves. |
|
|
HN again! ‘Most’ programmers are not doing that; most programmers couldn’t do that if their life depended on it. Or maybe the definition of programmer is different : I am talking about people who have the word programmer, software developer or software engineer in their job title. This, by large, does not mean they can write software, even on a trivial level, compared to what it means here on HN. Most can, are and will be replaced by AI because they simply bad; a handful will remain, which are the good/talented and smart ones. For now at least.
So as can be seen on HN talking about gpt; here many believe we are safe; that’s because the people hanging around here in the bubble are safe for now. But that is because it seems most people here never worked with a 100000 person ‘software development’ outsourcing shop etc; you would definitely say after 5 minutes with ‘senior engineers’ there that they can be replaced by 5 lines of Python, let alone an AI.