|
|
|
|
|
by spiderfarmer
72 days ago
|
|
I recently spoke to a very junior developer (he's still in school) about his hobby projects. He doesn't have our bagage. He doesn't feel the anxiety the purists feel. He just pipes all errors right back in his task flow. He does period refactoring. He tests everything and also refactors the tests. He does automated penetration testing. There are great tools for everything he does and they are improving at breakneck speeds. He creates stuff that is levels above what I ever made and I spent years building it. I accepted months ago: adapt or die. |
|
How is that measured? Is his stuff maintainable? Is it fast? Are good architectural decisions baked in that won't prevent him from adding a critical new feature?
I don't understand where this masochism comes from. I'm a software developer, I'm an intelligent and flexible person. The LLM jockey might be the same kind of person, but I have years of actual development experience and NOTHING preventing me from stepping down to that level and doing the same thing, starting tomorrow. I've built some nice and complicated stuff in my life, I'm perfectly capable of running a LLM in a loop. Most of the stuff that people like to call prompt/agentic/frontier or whatever engineering is ridiculously simple, and the only reason I'm not spending much time on it is that I don't think it leads to the kind of results my employer expects from me.