[Metricon]

I have been writing software for over 40 years and have had a long time interest in and some work in AI over that time. I wouldn’t say this gives me any more prognosticating power about how all of this is ultimately going to go, but I believe we're soon nearing an area of plateauing; whether that's because the science itself is plateauing or the intervention of governments is going to force plateau it.

So if things continue as they are today, I think in the near future, being a software developer is going to be more analogous to the medical field, where in the medical field you have different levels of professional expertise.

Some will be like nurses, and some will be closer to a medic and a smaller set will be like doctors. Each with increasingly required knowledge and experience to fulfill a needed role.

Those who used to be actual software developers are going to be (or have to become) more in the doctor role with years of internship and practical experience to be the architects guiding the overall AI implementation of software development in organizations.

The medics are going to be people who are semi-technical, where they have some technical understanding but they don't dedicate themselves to it, like say product managers, where they jump in to help development along, but don't need to have many years of experience or very deep technical knowledge.

At the nurse level, it's probably going to be similar to what people would do in the past with no code tools, where somebody in marketing who knows very little to nothing about coding at all is just going to directly converse with AI systems, but they'll never be likely to get anything more advanced than the tools they could think up for themselves.

Of course, it's so hard to tell what the next big discovery or changes to the nature of world society might push things in one direction or another.

[ChrisMarshallNY]

Just FYI, if you know much about the medical field, nurses tend to do most of the actual work, with highly experienced nurses actually taking up the mantle for many duties often done by doctors. Nurses are in far higher demand, than doctors.

Your analogy isn’t necessarily wrong, but it might ignore the extreme importance of nurses. Many medical facilities are only staffed with permanent nurses, with doctors helicoptering in, from time to time, to take care of specific duties that may require certain licenses, or provide specific advice.

So lots of jobs for nurses.

[sarchertech]

> Many medical facilities are only staffed with permanent nurses, with doctors helicoptering in, from time to time, to take care of specific duties that may require certain licenses, or provide specific advice.

Maybe for a very loose definition of medical facilities that includes assisted living facilities.

But for example in an ER, nurses come and go with very rapid turnover and it’s common to staff with temporary travel nurses.

> nurses tend to do most of the actual work

Techs, environmental services, phlebotomists, respiratory therapists, CNAs etc. probably do more of the “work” than nurses.

> highly experienced nurses actually taking up the mantle for many duties often done by doctors

Only if they go back to school and become a Nurse Practitioner or CRNA, but in that case they are no longer functioning as a nurse. Even then they are general operating under the direct supervision of a physician.

> Nurses are in far higher demand, than doctors.

Only in absolute numbers. It’s far harder to hire a doctor than it is a nurse. I know an ex-NFL player who works as a physician recruiter.

[mejutoco]

> Many medical facilities are only staffed with permanent nurses, with doctors helicoptering in, from time to time, to take care of specific duties that may require certain licenses, or provide specific advice.

> Maybe for a very loose definition of medical facilities that includes assisted living facilities.

Or midwives, for unimportant things like giving birth /s obviously

[sarchertech]

Nurse midwives have to go back to grad school after becoming a nurse and are no longer operating as nurses. Despite containing the word nurse it is a completely different job.

[Retric]

I think the only metric that matters is total medical care provided on a national / global scale.

It may take vastly more training but on average a full annual physical provides less benefit on average than a 30 second vaccination requiring minimal training. Value creation and skill are wildly different things in the medical profession.

[mlrtime]

There is no reason the medical field needs to gate keep injections. Anyone can inject, you don't need a nurse. Maybe as far as an IV with some very basic training.

[vkou]

After you've had that 30 second vaccination, the second same 30 second vaccination provides next-to-no added benefit, but the physical does.

[Retric]

The day after your physical doing another physical provides next to no benefit.

Healthcare is a world of diminishing returns at ever increasing costs. But that doesn’t mean the low effort first steps are less valuable.

[sarchertech]

Nurses may administer vaccines. (but you don’t need to be a nurse to do this. Medical assistants do it too. It’s a very easy procedure).

But nurses aren’t the driver of vaccination. Nurses are anti-vaxxers at a much higher rate than physicians, and if you removed physicians from the equation, vaccine rates would plummet.

>total medical care provided

At the end of the day a physician is responsible for every patient that comes through. Nurses are incredibly important, but all of the care they provide is at the direction of a physician, so it’s impossible to separate out “total medical care provided” into doctor vs nurse.

[theshrike79]

> So lots of jobs for nurses.

Exactly. (Experienced) Nurses can do ALL of the basic stuff we currently use doctors for. They diagnose patients with a glance (not by going to medical school but with raw lived experience on the field), administer medications etc.

And in some countries (I think the UK?) they are allowed to do more of the doctor-y stuff to free Actual Doctors to do the stuff they studied for years for.

The same thing will come to the software industry. All of the basic CRUD HTTP API crap can be done by "nurses", just run of the mill domain experts can wire up a basic UI + API + DB -combo for a product MVP with AI assistance.

And with a "doctor" (more experienced programmer/architect) guiding the process, the quality will be slightly above average. Not artisanal excellence, but how many services actually need that, really?

I think I've mentioned this before, but the only ones whose jobs are at risk at the moment are the mid-tier programmers. Either by skill or experience.

Juniors can learn to work with AIs and easily become the "nurses" of programming.

Programmers with decades of experience in multiple fields can either go full the artisanal-no-AI route and do the things AI's suck at or do AI assisted programming, which isn't really that different from working with a team.

But the midtier people who are too well paid to be "nurses" and not experienced enough to work as "doctors" might find it hard to find a place for themselves.

[sarchertech]

> Exactly. (Experienced) Nurses can do ALL of the basic stuff we currently use doctors for.

That’s not true. They do completely different jobs. Some experienced nurses could do some things that we currently require doctors to do.

Other experienced nurses have problems doing basic dosage calculation.

The main difference that addition to med school being much more selective, rigorous, and longer, residency is regimented, standardized, supervised, and evaluated in a way that nursing experience isn’t.

There are entire teams of doctors who spend hours every month discussing each resident’s progress (I know because my wife runs the resident program for her department and I overhear the discussions in the background).

You might have one nurse who worked in the ER for 5 years who can diagnose appendicitis as well as a doctor, but another who worked there for 20 years who couldn’t even begin to do that.

And since diagnosing appendicitis is not part of their job description, both could have absolutely stellar performance reviews.

And the nurse who can diagnose appendicitis, might be terrible at other tasks normally handled by a doctor.

The solution for this is to put them through more standardized on the job training/evaluation, but you’ve just reinvented residency at that point. That’s the thing people don’t understand about residency, it’s as much evaluation as it is training.

No amount of on the job experience is equivalent because job experience isn’t rigorously regimented, and evaluated.

[wickedsight]

Yeah, I kinda feel like OP is missing the fact that it kinda already is the way they described. The majority of devs are mediocre at best and work on variations of mostly the same CRUD apps for different businesses. Only a relatively small number of people work on complicated stuff that requires CS knowledge.

There's a much bigger group of people building games with Unity than the number of people building complicated engines like Unity. Same for [insert Javascript framework here].

[Metricon]

I completely agree with you, and I certainly meant no offense to anyone who's a practicing nurse.

I spent some time in the military, and my expression of medics and nurses are mostly derived from that experience, where I'm referring to a nurse as just any warm body who is able to provide aid.

For professional nurses who might work in hospitals, I'm sure that many of them have significant knowledge and experience to be very effective in providing medical assistance.

[neitherboosh]

I think what's actually happening is that the "threshold" of technical understanding required to be more productive than average is increasing, and other non-technical skills are becoming more important. Those below the threshold are not able to provide value over anyone else, even if they have a lot of technical experience. For example, I think today a strong PM with no technical ability can produce higher quality technical output compared to a mediocre frontend developer with no project management ability.

[jimbob45]

For example, I think today a strong PM with no technical ability can produce higher quality technical output compared to a mediocre frontend developer with no project management ability.

Wishful thinking by the managerial class. At best they can vibe code but they can’t verify that what was written is correct.

[CalRobert]

Well, they can try it out and see if it does what they want.

[lelele]

Sure, but how confident can they be that it doesn't also do things they don't want?

Tests can't be exhaustive, whereas even a mediocre developer is likely to possess enough background knowledge to notice risks that a non-developer would not think to test.

Some people keep forgetting that we haven't reached AGI yet. These tools can still make serious and sometimes obvious mistakes. Not long ago, vibe-coded software could embed credentials directly. That particular blunder seems to have been addressed, but there is still no reliable way to tell an LLM to avoid every class of obvious blunder.

[mlrtime]

The un-hidden secret is that QA and real testing doesn't exist much anymore. People aren't surprised when things break, they just want it fixed quickly, and AI can do that.

[lelele]

Mmm... People may overlook a glitch here and there, but judging by reviews on app stores, it seems to me that people get very annoyed when things break, especially when it happens at the worst possible time.

As for AI fixing things... Sure, at least for a while. But in my experience, AI can hit a wall and start going in circles. It doesn't happen often, but it can happen. And when it does, what recourse will you have for fixing the tangled mess that vibe coding tends to produce?

[lelele]

P.S. Again, it all boils down to AGI not being with us yet. I guesstimate that AI writes at least 95% of my code, but given how often LLMs come up with inefficient or ineffective solutions, I'd never entrust my reputation to a vibe-coded app. Startups may have little to lose vs much to gain from a shorter time to market, but an established company?

[CalRobert]

I hear you, but when their choices are “flawed solution that exists” vs “perfect one that doesn’t” they will pick the former most of the time.

[lelele]

Sure, but the original comment was more like “flawed solution that exists” vs “decent solution that exists”, wasn't it? That is: vibe-coding can't replace developers yet, not even mediocre ones.

[ElFitz]

Which is basically what most of them already did with software engineers anyway.

[Foobar8568]

Neither is your mediocre frontend developer.

[NitpickLawyer]

> Wishful thinking by the managerial class.

Heh. I wouldn't be so fast in calling this one, yet. It might go either way, or a combination of the two, who knows... Things are moving and progressing fast enough to at least be wary of, and keeping an eye on things. I wouldn't be surprised of any outcome, tbh.

On the one hand, PMs get to hone in a set of skills that include lots of juggling resources, bridging the gap between stake holders and people that execute, work with different layers of technical expertise, lots of back and forth and so on. Having to "call" a thing after talking to 5 people from 6 different PoVs is interestingly something that could make them quite good at using "AI". They're already used to working with "jagged expertise" so to say. And that's really close to what "agents" do today. You might get a session where claude/gpt/gemeni turns out a brilliant piece of technical artefact, or you might get an average piece of content that misses key important aspects that a "human" could see from a mile away.

On the other hand, LLMs do one thing quite well: they raise the floor of what "minimum effort" in a thing gets you. So things like language barriers, basic processes, procedures, etc. get elevated to a level where you can use these tools and be better off than not using these concepts at all. So a very talented engineer that previously had these issues, could now use LLMs to get better at auxiliary but "unimportant" aspects of integrated that technical experience into other places. In a "90% of the time people expect this to work like this" way, but with the floor being raised. One quick example of this would be a technically sound piece of software that now has bare-minimum ux/ui from this century, instead of "engineer GUI" aspect :)

Who knows where this all goes. Yesterday there was an article here about someone taking a bunch of languages, asking an agent to mix concepts from all of them and slop a "new uber language" design. Is it the ultimate language that many have tried before? 99% sure it's not. Or at least this one won't be. But there's a chance, with how many people can now prompt their way to a PoC quite quickly, that we eventually get something cool. No idea how that'd look like, but it's likely the "you'll know it when you see it" kind of thing.

[root_axis]

In such a future where LLMs hypothetically dominate the SDLC, the trade would be much more like pottery than medicine - i.e. a commodity in such obscene abundance that its functional utility would be entirely divorced from its creation.

In such a future there would be a handful of lucky well paid artisans, a healthy community of hobbyists, and the overwhelming population of the planet who would be perfectly content to delegate their entire software diet to generative superplatforms that script themselves to perform any arbitrary software function. The idea of paying for individual bespoke software programs would become an anachronism for an era where software was so difficult to produce that entire teams spent years painstakingly tweaking programs to spec.

[Metricon]

This is why I mentioned the plateauing. If for some reason that just doesn't happen and things continue at a relatively linear or even exponential rate, then all bets are off.

I'd like to imagine that it's ultimately going to work out for humanity to be in a better condition overall if that happens.

However, if there reaches a level of near or full autonomy in all aspects of knowledge work, then there is a strong possibility that the field with the highest growth potential is going to be in "Private Security"; as those who have access to the most resources seek to defend their own positions in a societal return towards aristocracy and serfdom.

Let's hope not though.

[Aeolun]

I think the big difference is that the only thing anyone ever needs a pot to do is hold fluids (or soil). It's a lot easier to spec out than a modern software product.

[NitpickLawyer]

> anyone ever needs a pot to do is hold fluids

Yes, but this might also be a counter-point to your position. In a world of rising baselines, having a "pot but without all the bells and whistles" might be a thing people need. Instead of having a pot that holds fluids at every conceivable angle with 20 temperature thresholds, 5 versions that hold liquid in a cloud for you, with monthly subscriptions, having the ability to get a "like a pot but make it left handed and only holds sand because this is what I need" could turn out to be something that people want/need/end up chasing.

In other words spec down, not up, and base + my particular kind of a pot.

[CatMustard]

> a pot that holds fluids at every conceivable angle with 20 temperature thresholds, 5 versions that hold liquid in a cloud for you, with monthly subscriptions, having the ability to get a "like a pot but make it left handed and only holds sand because this is what I need"

Ah I see you're familiar with PowerPot by Atlassian(TM)

Very powerful potware, pity about how much soil it leaks.

[thisisit]

Current discussions is like deja vu. One time there was hype around of no code/low code development using PowerApps, Zapier etc.

The sell was - Creating your apps was easier than before. You don't need to know any programming language. You don't need IT. You have a GUI and just drag and drop and visual your apps. Just fill the fields and voila your app is ready.

The criticism of the approach was that low codes apps might not be secure, unsuitable for large scale and critical apps, and lead to increase in unsupported apps by "shadow IT".

The same reasoning exists today for AI coding. Anyone can create apps, its not great for complex and mission critical apps, might not be secure etc. And lots of discussion like your post parsing the future too closely.

Low/no code apps have continue to grow. But many of the low/no code tool users are developers who use it to make their jobs easier.

While some might say - this time it is different. I believe we are currently we are the beginning of the cycle so everyone is excited to use their PowerApps shaped Claude Code/Codex to make their 100th budget tracking app but as time passes and edge cases are figured out the biggest users for AI are going to be software developers (and I believe they currently are the biggest users).

As for software engineering jobs just like before engineers will be expected to output more and faster. This has happened with every innovation from assembly compiler to IDE to low/no code ways of building.

The different levels of expertise exists even today and it will remain so.

[theshrike79]

You know the people who create elaborate Zapier/n8n/excel automations?

Those are the people who will get the boost from AI coding. They have the "lazy" mindset every good programmer has. You do a thing 3 times manually and then your brain goes, nnnope. This needs to be automated. And you get to work.

With the n8n's of the world they can get something done, limited by what they offer. Same with Excel, there's a limit to what you can do with macros and VBA.

But with an AI agent there really is no limit. I have seen first hand the things domain experts can do when just given a Claude seat and the permission to build stuff. Things I could've easily built, but never would've found out are actually needed.

And doing the same thing with a programming team and project managers in the loop with the domain expert being the product owner would've taken months and cost six figures in salaries.

[andeee23]

i don't think it's the same exact conversation. with low code tools you still need to poke around, figure out what you want, what to do, etc.

with the latest agents, you can even be vague and they'll probably do an ok job if it's not something super complicated. some models are also pretty good at stopping to let you know about stuff you haven't thought about and ask for clarification.

so you can outsource thinking now, not just the doing part.

[thisisit]

> you still need to poke around, figure out what you want, what to do, etc.

Is it different? because then:

> you can even be vague, and they'll probably do an ok job if it's not something super complicated

That's lot of qualifiers to say maybe, should be possible - how does someone who is not a software engineer know what is complex, vague or ok. There are lot of assumptions to say - This time it is different.

It is entirely possible it is different but I am yet to find a convincing argument.

[SoftTalker]

Tech work has been organized and divided this way for decades.

[threethirtytwo]

This is like the most idealized future.

I think many people will wish it was like this. But when AI becomes so capable that a nobody who doesn't understands computers a well as a "doctor" uses AI to create something BETTER or superior or just as good then employers will think... why am I paying that "doctor" more than that nobody?

See right now everything is fine, because AI is not that good yet. But if it gets better. Well. The future will be one where we trust AI more and more.

[langs]

That’s a good analogy, but I think the reason we currently need the "nurse" role is the need to interact with the physical world. Most software products don't require this step, so the demand for “nurses” or "doctors" will likely decrease. If robotics technology continues to advance, the number of nurses in real world will also decrease in the foreseeable future.

[rwyinuse]

Nurses will likely be one of the last professions to be significantly impacted by robotics. Drivers, factory, warehouse, agriculture workers, cashiers etc will be automated away way before them.

It's just hard to design robots that can handle patients that may be simultaneously fragile, mentally handicapped and aggressive in a way that doesn't hurt them and respects their rights. It can take multiple human nurses to do a seemingly simple thing like changing a diaper.

[fragmede]

The demand for nurses and doctors is only going to go up. Not just int their current roles, but everything adjacent to them as well. Everything involved with running trials of health care products. Humans aren't going away, and they need to be taken care of.

[somenameforme]

If LLMs reach a point of sufficiently high competence to the point that they're capable of producing usable software from vague, and sometimes contradictory instructions - the same software engineers have to regularly deal with, then at that point software will simply be an expectation of ability in any job.

So I think it would be more comparable to something like literacy. There was a time when that was a fairly uncommon and highly valued skill. Now the guy flipping burgers or pouring a cup of coffee is also almost certainly fully literate. And in fact many jobs have evolved in a way such that it became mandatory, but only because it was already ubiquitous. I expect to see the same thing with software. The industry of producing software that do fairly simple tasks will probably die, but in its place will be a vast array of heavily customized and oft iterated software for companies and people achieving their own stuff.

The mobile industry is a perfect example of where this will be massive shift. Right now there's a million mobile apps to execute extremely basic functionality on phones, but it's loaded with advertising, begging, and general annoyances. As are the app stores themselves. When you can make software that does that in a few minutes with a single prompt, and people realize this (as we're already practically at this point), then that will be the end of those apps. This is because the one thing LLMs have shown is that natural language interfaces are way less friction than using search, whether on the web or an app store. And so there will be a time when it will be lower friction to simply just quickly build your own app to do [whatever] than dealing with somebody trying to monetize an alarm clock.

[threethirtytwo]

Right making apps and building infrastructure and scaling and making software will become like reading. Everyone and anyone can do it.

[Borg3]

And yet, there is a lot said about how youngsters cannot read with understanding... Fun times ahead...

[Toutouxc]

> If LLMs reach a point of sufficiently high competence to the point that they're capable of producing usable software from vague, and sometimes contradictory instructions - the same software engineers have to regularly deal with, then at that point software will simply be an expectation of ability in any job.

I don’t understand how people can say this and then continue talking about software. So we’re saying machines can now casually do complex and cognitively demanding jobs like software development (or 90% of all white-collar jobs out there) and we’re NOT worried about the lynching mob going door to door and hanging IT people on lampposts? And I’m being serious, the impact this would have on societies would be unprecedented.

[exitb]

The only truly unprecedented thing is the white-collar part. Otherwise it happened many times over that entire regions where suddenly out of job and job prospects. Automation and offshoring have equivalent impacts on the affected job market.

[sdevonoes]

If LLMs can handle 99% of software jobs, then they can “crack” robotics software and then we would have LLMs on robots to replace the rest of the workers

[hard_times]

If you automate the creation of software, you essentially can automate almost any white-collar job.

[somenameforme]

I don't think this is necessarily true. Software that was mostly tools will be automated because it generally has a "simple" and specific purpose, but consider software that is the final product itself - like a game. LLMs are nowhere even remotely near the level of being able to independently automate the creation of a non-trivial game, though of course they can be a tremendous tool in the creation of such.

And I think that example largely carries over to many other big picture and/or creative tasks. I think it would likely require another revolutionary leap for LLMs to get to that point, and that leap is probably not coming any time soon, if ever, at least not with LLMs.

Another practical issue is that LLMs, as difficult as it can be to imagine at times, are still just glorified autocomplete machines. And so genuinely novel advances will not be coming from LLMs. For instance take LLMs back to the early 20th century and none of them will discover relativity, even with infinite power/time. It's just so unlike their training material, and in direct contradiction to much of it, that it's simply outside their reach, let alone grasp.

[p-e-w]

> So if things continue as they are today, I think in the near future, being a software developer is going to be more analogous to the medical field, where in the medical field you have different levels of professional expertise.

The medical field is also going to change though. Massively. Because people are going to realize you don’t need to pay someone $400k per year to hand out advice about moderate exercise and which antibiotic is appropriate for a sneeze-cough with yellow mucus.

Regulation isn’t going to prevent this. AI is already way too easily accessible to ever rein it in again. Not to mention that the US now has serious competition from a hostile country, so they can regulate their own AIs all they want without it making a difference in practice.

[zerobees]

> Because people are going to realize you don’t need to pay someone $400k per year to hand out advice about moderate exercise and which antibiotic is appropriate for a sneeze-cough with yellow mucus.

Who is going to realize that?

The same forces that prevent you from walking into a pharmacy and asking for antibiotics based on what you found on WebMD will prevent you from doing it with a ChatGPT printout in hand. Lawyers and doctors are the best-known examples of industries that are in control of who gets admitted to practice the profession.

[hattmall]

It's basically a formality now to get a prescription for what you read on WebMD. Every Insurance has telemedicine, you just call, read the symptom list and get the prescription. Some even let you just email. There's a doctor or at least person with subscribing ability in the loop, but they are barely doing more than rubber stamping hundreds of requests per day.

[sarchertech]

Only for less regulated drugs and for drugs with minimal side effects, or drugs that are relatively cheap.

Mostly for drugs that should probably be OTC anyway. Try doing that for a narcotic, or for an expensive biologic.

You could always lie to a doctor about your symptoms.

[Forgeties79]

Idk man I was in the EU recently as a US citizen. One 15min call about my sore throat and dude gave me not just Tylenol and antibiotics (not too wild) but also oral steroids which was beyond overkill for what I had - very rare moment where I didn’t do what the doctor ordered. I was very surprised to see that prescribed. They didn’t even recommend nexium or anything to protect my stomach.

[sarchertech]

If you’re youngish and healthy a short course of an oral steroid is very low risk and doesn’t require a PPI. And it’s indicated for severe throat pain.

There’s nothing wild about that prescription.

[mminer237]

You've been able to Google your symptoms and get a maybe answer for twenty years. I don't see how AI replaces doctors any more than WebMD did.

[red75prime]

By achieving the same or a higher level of effectiveness than doctors, obviously.

[sarchertech]

My wife is a pediatric ER doctor. She’s board certified in pediatrics and pediatric emergency medicine. Here’s a scenario that regularly plays out.

Someone she’s knows calls her up late and says their child has a minor fever, upset stomach or some other mild symptom. They ask “should I go to the ER or can I just wait till tomorrow to go to the pediatrician?”

My wife says it’s totally fine to wait until tomorrow. That is not an emergency. And frequently she’ll tell them they don’t even need to go to their pediatrician unless it gets worse or continues for several days.

9/10 what happens is that the person goes to the ER or their pediatrician first thing in the morning and calls my wife to tell her “you were right, it wasn’t an emergency”.

Despite that my wife is more highly trained than either their pediatrician or a non-pediatric ER doctor, and they know and trust her, they still wanted to see someone in person.

It doesn’t matter how accurate AI diagnosis gets, that’s not going to change anytime soon.

[red75prime]

> they still wanted to see someone in person.

Well, that someone might use AI diagnostic tools too.

[sarchertech]

They might. But they don’t want to talk to someone with a 6 week course who reads a diagnosis from a tablet. They want to talk to an expert.

Physicians have to understand the diagnosis and treatment plan. At the end of the day, they are legally responsible for the patient.

[alternatex]

Nothing effective about self-diagnosis. Quick and easy yes, but not effective. Most things that are worth diagnosing require a visit to a clinic. No doctor is going to lose a job because people are self-diagnosing using the internet.

[red75prime]

It wouldn't be "Ah! It's lupus." It would be "I need the results of such-and-such tests to make a differential diagnosis."

[watwut]

They gonna get more work due to results of self diagnosis from the internet.

[freedomben]

As long as doctors continue to hoard the sole ability to grant access to medications (currently a legal monopoly), they are safe from AI. Expect that to be a very, very long process. They'll continue to be the gatekeepers as long as they have the power, and they are still quite powerful.

[Fordec]

Welcome to the current day difference between being an Accredited Engineer and being a Developer. The only thing that's happening is that the Developer side are getting a wake up call.

[strange_quark]

Bad take. What you're describing already exists.

> Some will be like nurses, and some will be closer to a medic and a smaller set will be like doctors. Each with increasingly required knowledge and experience to fulfill a needed role.

Nursing and being a physician aren't really the same thing at all, and they require different skill sets, it's not just "having more knowledge". Just because someone is an amazing surgeon doesn't mean they would also make a good nurse.

> Those who used to be actual software developers are going to be (or have to become) more in the doctor role with years of internship and practical experience to be the architects guiding the overall AI implementation of software development in organizations.

I think you just described a staff swe

> The medics are going to be people who are semi-technical, where they have some technical understanding but they don't dedicate themselves to it, like say product managers, where they jump in to help development along, but don't need to have many years of experience or very deep technical knowledge.

These people already exist. They are the business analysts who know SQL and maybe Python, R, or VBA. Marketing people who work on Wordpress landing pages. People doing systems integration, the IT department, sales engineers, and on, and on, and on.

> At the nurse level, it's probably going to be similar to what people would do in the past with no code tools, where somebody in marketing who knows very little to nothing about coding at all is just going to directly converse with AI systems, but they'll never be likely to get anything more advanced than the tools they could think up for themselves.

You said it, no code/low-code has existed forever.

[esafak]

Why would the government force the technology to plateau when the Chinese won't? Outdoing the Chinese is the Trump admin's biggest hobby.

[goatlover]

Could have sworn it was trying to convince Iran to accept a peace plan after killing their former leaders who would have committed to one.