|
|
|
|
|
|
by tivert
1043 days ago
|
|
|
> I don't think so. Junior engineers will learn much much faster than the past (think about how much more effective GPT4 is as a learning tool than the "rubber ducky method" or manpages or even stackoverflow). That's bunk. The OP is literally "feel[s] the need to hire junior" engineers because he can ChatGPT that work. How are they going to learn a job they won't be given the opportunity to have much faster? > If GPTx ends up in the narrow area where it's universally smarter than junior engs but definitely not capable of being a senior eng, then junior engs will just shift to the little remaining work for senior engs, shadow them for months to years like an apprenticeship. That doesn't make much sense. That kind of apprenticeship would be pure charity, so it's not going to happen. No one is going to learn to be a senior engineer in "months," and no one (except someone's rich parents) is going to pay for someone to sit around unproductively in and office for years while they learn. Even interns are required to produce output that adds value. They do that by successfully completing junior-level tasks that need to be done well. |
|
|
There's always a set of junior eng with high growth potential who are being trained to become senior. They will continue be hired, albeit with less simple work than before, because most companies do run scenario planning like "what if X left who is our backup".
The juniors who are not expected to ever grow to that level would no longer be sought out for simpler tasks as those tasks will be automated away.
Net impact is fewer total engineers, but those who remain are at a higher level of average skill.