ProgrammerHumor
techCompaniesMarketing
Is it just me or does every recent headline feels more like a campaign to scare off future devs? Instagram is full of it...
Honestly, I’m losing trust in companies pushing this narrative. Feels more like manipulation than progress.
Discussion
They don't need headlines for this. The education system and iPad parents are doing it all for us. Also, not how this meme works.
My bad! Should the bottom be equal?
The text shouldn't change in the bottom panels since the idea is that in the movie the pages are being flipped as gru explains it, and then he read something excitedly just to realize that its not really good, idk the context of the scene though, watched it once years ago...
Yes. Ideally you should have combined text from 3 + 4 and copied the text on both, but it’s a lot of words and it still works how you made it. This critic just has their panties in a wad
Yes also more lewd minions
Don't forget the layoffs, too. Companies right now are betting hard that this will be It (c)(tm) for them to succeed and justify the massive investments in AI/ML, the hardware, etc.
Those in tech are basically hoping to will this into existence. Reality will probably bite hardest when the lawsuits (i.e. some major guffaw, issue, and/or death) are traced back to the use of AI, but time will tell.
Companies right now are betting hard that this will be It (c)(tm) for them to succeed and justify the massive investments in AI/ML
Nope. Mass layoffs have always been how tech companies prop up their stock prices at the end of a hype cycle. It's a classic manoeuvre to signal to investors that they are taking drastic measures to right the ship.
Those in tech are basically hoping to will this into existence.
The reality is that, except for VCs, they don't really care either way since, at the end of the day, every bet is a safe bet from their point of view so as long as the company's stock price stays up, and they have already worked out long before how to make that happen even when a major product gets them nowhere.
2023 was the largest round of concerted layoffs in a long time, if ever, for certain companies (i.e. Google 12k, Meta 11k, Amazon 27k). Last time we saw anything like this was the dot com burst. Small periodic layoffs dont usually cover 10+% of the workforce.
People said the same type of things about the internet as well. Especially after the .com bust.
There is def some over investing going on, but "AI" is here to stay. What stays around will be determined by who survives the bubble pop.
I don't recall the internet ever being reported as the "doom for all [insert worker/job here]". It was certainly hyped as transformative to the job market, just not, well, replacing large chunks of it.
What we're seeing here is what appears to be a concerted effort by various tech leaders to drive down the cost of labor without much evidence to justify it (beyond "it will totally do these things; trust me bro!"). I know folks in companies right now making bold claims around how much % of the code is now being made by AI, and the reality of that % is rather small, sad, and not exactly 'transformative'. Take that anecdote as you will.
I'm not saying AI is going away. But it hasn't exactly found its "killer app" yet that justifies the massive investments being made, and I expect it to be naturally relegated to a few niches that actually provide a net revenue.
I don't recall the internet ever being reported as the "doom for all [insert worker/job here]". It was certainly hyped as transformative to the job market, just not, well, replacing large chunks of it.
I started in tech innthe mid 90s. I was hearing about the internet killing brick and morter retail back then. Especially before the .COM bubble popped.
What we're seeing here is what appears to be a concerted effort by various tech leaders to drive down the cost of labor without much evidence to justify it (beyond "it will totally do these things; trust me bro!"). I know folks in companies right now making bold claims around how much % of the code is now being made by AI, and the reality of that % is rather small, sad, and not exactly 'transformative'. Take that anecdote as you will.
I am working for a very large company as an SDET. They are forcing Amazon Q on us. It's meh at best for me. From what I can tell, they are expecting a 30% or more throughput improvement from us.
I have been through this before. I was a manual tester at one point. They are always wildly optimistic about productivity gains at first. We do eventually get there, though. I have built systems that could do about 600 hrs of manual testing in 4 hrs. It just took a lot longer to build than they wanted.
I'm not saying AI is going away. But it hasn't exactly found its "killer app" yet that justifies the massive investments being made, and I expect it to be naturally relegated to a few niches that actually provide a net revenue
The killer app is replacing humans with code. It is already happening. Phone support is being decimated right now. More will come.
I was hearing about the internet killing brick and morter retail back then.
TBF, it might not have killed it, but it took a large enough chunk out to put it on life support.
Yup. COVID took another big chunk as well.
It's like cobol in the 90s programmers making bank
Hope we can make the same debugging AI Python code in a decade or two lol
The Python code out there is already awful, AI can't do much worse.
Give em a couple years and then they will figure out our skills were never coding, code was just the tool we use.
I was on a training call last week learning some propriety C# that uses custom objects and methods that only exist in this software.
A PM in the call suggested we could just do this with OpenAI.
Good luck with that.
Edit: I wanted to say “AI could for sure do your job”
are y'all betting that computer science will just be even better for people?
because salaries are up but so is unemployment. I'm not sure if that will go down or not
I stayed out with last year's wave of layoffs. I did my part to raise y'alls salaries, you're welcome.
Where are the salaries at an all-time high?? Things mostly seem to have plateaued around here, and I expect some more massive big tech layoffs in the next year
Still waiting for that "dev salaries hit all time high" part.
I have friends in industry for over 25 years and make under $150k.
Imagine $2k/year raise for 25 years. Doesn't even cover CoL adjustment.
How many times have they tried to remove the developer and make "easier" coding ... it never succeeds, and all too often it then requires specialized developers to work on it, that usually cost more. Languages too that AI is going to struggle with as there will lack models to learn off.
The only people I see anytime soon is the Jr Developer, but that could risk then create a vacuum.
Damn, it's almost like supply and demand exists... maybe this is a double bluff to make dev salaries increase by convincing people that AI will reduce salaries.
I'm really hoping that this whole AI thing will actually make it easier for devs to get a job so long as you aren't dependent on AI doing basic things for you.
Companies NEED AI to be the next big thing cause… there’s really nothing else. All these tech companies have run out of growth. They’ve more or less optimized extracting max value from consumers on existing offerings.
That’s what’s driving the layoffs. But without AI there’s really nothing on the horizon. And the industry knows if you jam it down people’s throats have “thought leaders” run endless seminars on AI that that will get companies to buy, that consumers will eventually latch onto something. They’re trying to create a market for a product through sheer fucking hopium.
Wait, is the 4th panel actually happening IRL?
My youtube algorithm absolutely loves these doom and gloom videos. Only after a sustained period of never watching one of them and only watching AI skepticism videos did it finally get the message. The default though for anyone watching programming content is a lot of “coding is dead. Here’s why I’ve given up and you should too” trash
Even when AI does get to the point where it's good enough to make usable code, you will still need people who understand the code to use it effectively. It's actually a tool to let you type faster.
One of the biggest problems in software development is that customers and clients don't even know how to describe what they want. They may have a perfect image in their head of what the software should look like, but that perfect image means nothing if they don't even have the ability to describe it.
Even if they manage to do so, there‘s always a ton of contradictions to sort out
And even beyond that, there are plenty of situations where the statement of “you think you do, but you don’t” truly is accurate.
Reminds me of someone mentioning a client asking for a web page with horizontal mouseover scrolling with no override (no bottom scroll bar or signifiers). Like babe it sounds great for you, but if you don’t have any way for the user to navigate your web page intuitively, and nobody wants to hover their cursor over the side of the screen for 5+ seconds to get to where they want to go.
Even the product managers can't describe it. What a world we live in.
As a non programmer, what do you need to describe to help them understand?
What you actually want. The issue is, you rarely know what you actually want, not in any malicious way necessarily, you may have a very clear idea of "what you want" only to realize as it becomes reality that it ISN'T actually what you want, but you still don't know what you DO want, until you've gone through that process enough times to accidentally stumble on what you actually wanted but didn't know enough about tech to actually describe.
Well I got the the main intent from the first comment, what I was asking for is an example on how to be specific towards getting what you want. It varies under the circumstance but I don't see how it's a big problem when the programmer could politely reply to the client telling them it's out of their reach and compromise other ways under their advice, that's what they're paid to do right?
A lot of people don't really consider the sheer number of scenarios that a given ask encompasses. Then when those scenarios happen, it leads to unexpected, or downright destructive behavior.
A lot of people don't think in terms of pure instruction/output. They're like "just make it work". But what does that mean? It's too subjective.
There was a great example of using BDD (Behavior Driven Design) to detail how an ATM might work and the process to go through to identify the Outcomes, Outputs, Process, Scenarios, and Inputs (OOPSI) that I like to refer to but I can't seem to find it. If I happen across it, I'll link it here.
Spot on.
If it ever becomes powerful enough to destroy our jobs, we can just use it to program nefarious causes against ceos. Whose going to be better off a world run by AI, people that understand the tech or the idiots just typing baseless prompts?
Back in the day I went to school and got my Airline Dispatch license. Doing a dispatch by hand might take two hours, but they have programs to do it basically instantly. They still employ plenty of dispatchers because they have 50% responsibility if anything happens to the flight.
This. It's a pretty good auto complete. Sometimes it gets into a groove and it knows what I'm gonna do next. Other times it's like "NO COPILOT STOP DOING THAT" which sucks in python where I'm hitting tab to indent it's like "yes you wanted this" then I have to delete a wack piece of code.
I usually compare it to the lathe for furniture manufacturing. They dramatically increased productivity (with some estimates coming it at 1000x productivity over the course of the 19th century) but you can't just plop some rando from off the street in front of a lathe and expect them to make you a chair. And if you did that, you'll be lucky if said rando keeps all their fingers.
With modern AI tools, you might be able to get more out of the same number of devs, or the same with slightly less devs. But we're a long way off from being able to plop some guy off the street in front of an AI assistant and them being able to make enterprise-grade software.
AI bros love it compare AI use with calculators, but completely miss the point.
It's as if a calculator would fix an idiot's issues with arithmetic. It's a tool, a powerful but sometimes wrong tool, which requires expertise to to fuck the project up, which requires years of "manual" experience to acquire.
Letting AI generate not-quite boilerplate that previously wasn't really generate-able by an IDE is by far my favorite use of LLMs.
Well said
AI is autocomplete on steroids
And u still need humans to develop the AI to get to write that much usable code