[dexwiz]

I view AI like a gas pedal. For an experienced driver it can really help. For someone new, straight into a wall. For some code you go straight for hours and barely touch the steering wheel. For some code it's all wheel and too much gas is a mistake.

That said, we will need less coders overall. Just like you don't need human drafters or calculators in the same way. It will cut the bottom out of the industry, and entry level will be expected operate like a senior from 10 years ago.

[ethbr1]

Or as the article put it:

>> Most workers, and most work days, are just drudgery. Answering emails. Writing up quarterly plans. Reviewing metrics. Building applications that do something with data.

Yes. Those jobs are going to disappear. If your role's primary value is shuffling paper around an org, or putting minor edits on something before forwarding, your job is going to disappear to AI in the next 1-3 years.

Or AI-initiated human process optimization in the next 2-5 years, which I think is an underappreciated second wave.

To define that: if we 10x or 100x the productivity of certain roles, won't companies look at the remaining unaccelerated human speedbumps and ask "Is it really that important we have a person do that? Because it's now costing us substantial latency and throughput of the process as a whole."

And in many cases they'll likely conclude that no, it's not critical that a human be involved at that point. So poof those jobs as well.

As a result, we'll have many fewer humans being much more productive.

Tbd on whether that produces enough surplus (and equal allocation of it) to balance out the job losses.

[kamaal]

If there are no people, there won't be a need for managers to exist either. Who/What are the managers going to manage? The office air?

Eventually whoever that is running the business has to be smart enough to figure out everything, and the margin for error will be small in a economic environment where every one is already poor and can't spend to buy your things.

I remember the days of socialist India. If everyone is poor its impossible to do the good things like research, development, innovation. The reason is simple, with no one having money to buy your things, you will never make profits to invest in them.

[BobaFloutist]

Maybe NOS is a better analogy, since even the newest of drivers is going to need and get use out of the gas pedal.

[dexwiz]

I think new devs could probably get use of it as a replacement for SO or Google. But if they slam on it and think they can vibe code a whole app, they are going to have a bad time.

But NOS may be better. It might make you faster but it doesn't make you better.