[lnenad]

It literally has and will even more in the future. It won't replace *all* software engineers but once the genie is out low effort low risk stuff will be done by an AI. Loveable and such have so many live projects, the alternative was a human building those.

[ThePhysicist]

Can you point to any "great" projects on Lovable that would actually be useful as full blown SaaS software tools? Stuff that has been written/prompted by non software experts?

[lnenad]

Please try to read my message again. I never said the things you're implying I said. I literally said not gonna replace all, and low effort low risk stuff.

Do you think that not even 0.00001 projects on those websites could have been a good payday for a software engineer/team? Do you think what took 3 people before for a low effort saas is not going to be done by 1 person now?

[rafterydj]

You're phrasing of "could have been a good payday" makes me think about why people pay for software at all. The bread and butter "quick job, get paid" gigs in software were always circumstantial and depended on humans understanding customer needs more than anything, and combining it with their own desires to grow in mastery of their work.

I'm reminded of the 'faster horses' remark from Ford - since AI by design produces what it thinks we are asking for, how will anyone know who to pay for true innovation?

[piker]

> alternative was a human building those

... or them not existing at all?

[lnenad]

I'm talking about actual live services that deliver money to someone, not toy projects. Do you think there's even a slight percentage of those or are 100% of the projects hosted by these services throwaway shit?

[piker]

No, I just mean there is a rate at which people wouldn't have been able to do them economically.

[lnenad]

The world isn't US based rates. There are plenty of people that would be taking these "non-economical" projects and being extremely happy with the money they can make from them.