• LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I mean honestly… probably. Not yet. But soon. Right now, ai can make lies and shitty code, but it’s probably not that far from making ok code. So there is likely going to be a surge in need for highly skilled programmers that can fix trash ai code that is…… almost there.

    Then we will have derivative code forever!!!

    Bleeeeegggghhhhttththght

    • webadict@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      AI can’t even tell how many Rs are in strawberry. I have seen the code AI makes, and it is not almost there. It is quite far away. Give AI 10 years, and it will be “almost there”, and even then it will still be incredibly shit code.

      • LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh I know. I’m it companies will totally buy into it and then have shitty code that people need to fix. Or not, just have trash code in prod, who cares!

    • four@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      AGI is just two years away. Each year. Since a few years. Like self-driving cars

      I think AI is still a long way from being able to manage a large project

        • LostXOR@fedia.io
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Guys fusion power is just 5 years away guys we’re almost at breakeven bro just give us another billion venture capital dollars we just need some stronger magnets cmon we’re so close dude just a little bit more

      • LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Oh definitely, but they are shoe horning it into everything! So the junior devs will have to ‘compete’ with a tool, that tool will output trash, senior devs will have to fix it

    • mogranja@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I don’t agree. To me it is like trying to make water cleaner but mixing it with contaminated water.

      • LadyMeow@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        If only you were execs! I don’t think this is a good thing. Far from, it will be a nightmare. But it will be cheaper than hiring new people, and then others will have to sort it out.

  • osaerisxero@kbin.melroy.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The reason programmers are cooked isn’t because AI can do the job, bit because idiots in leadership have decided that it can.

    • mkwt@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      At the end of the day, they still want their shit to work. It does, however, make things very uncomfortable in the mean time.

    • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      This is exactly what rips at me, being a low-level artist right now. I know Ai will only be able to imitate, and it lacks a “human quality.” I don’t think it can “replace artists.”

      …But bean-counters and executives, who have no grasp of art, marketing to people who also don’t understand art, can say it’s “good enough” and they can replace artists. And society seems to sway with “The Market”, which serves the desires of the wealthy.

      I point to how graphic design departments have been replaced by interns with a Canva subscription.

      I’m not going to give up art or coding, of course. I’m stubborn and driven by passion and now sheer spite. But it’s a constant, daily struggle, getting bombarded with propaganda and shit-takes that the disciplines you’ve been training your whole life to do “won’t be viable jobs.”

      And yet the work that “isn’t going anywhere” is either back-breaking in adverse conditions (hey, power to people that dig that lol) and/or can’t afford you a one-bedroom.

    • LeninOnAPrayer@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yep. Well said. They don’t need to create a better product. They need to create a new product that marketing can sell.

      Bugs are for the users to test.

      • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Of all the desk jobs, programmers are least likely to be doing bullshit jobs that it doesn’t matter if it’s done by a glorified random number generator.

        Like I never heard a programmer bemoan that they do all this work and it just vanishes into a void where nobody interacts with it.

        The main complaint is that if they make one tiny mistake suddenly everybody is angry and it’s your fault.

        Some managers are going to have some rude awakenings.

        • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Like I never heard a programmer bemoan that they do all this work and it just vanishes into a void where nobody interacts with it

          Where I work, there are at least 5 legacy systems that have been “finished” but abandoned before being used at all because of internal politics, as in, the fucker that moved heaven and hell to make the system NOW got fired the day after it was ready and the area that was supposed to use it didn’t want to.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Right but there was still the need in the moment to get it made, and presumably the programmer could tell it was functioning when they were testing it, and if they were let go and the system was abandoned, that kind of proves that they were necessary to make the system work.

            That’s different to having a job as a box ticker, where you write reports all day that don’t ever get read, and you know they don’t get read, and you’re paid to do it anyway.

            I think a lot of those jobs could be replaced with AI without anybody noticing right away. Although losing that expertise probably will have long term effects. I’m not saying they’re useless, I’m saying they know as they work that it won’t be paid attention to. That’s what I meant.

        • MonkeMischief@lemmy.today
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          I’m honestly really surprised to hear this. Not a professional programmer and have never acquired a full-time job, but it was still my impression that tons of code just gets painstakingly developed, then replaced, dropped, or lost in the couch cushions, based on how I’ve seen and heard of most organizations operating lol.

          • Excrubulent@slrpnk.net
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            You’re not wrong that there’s a lot of waste, but even if what you’re doing is inconsequential if done right, it still carries the potential to set everything on fire if you do it wrong.

          • Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            1 year ago

            Yes there is throwaway work but that doesn’t mean it doesn’t need to be done.

            Every line of code a programmer does is written so it can benefit the company or make the coder’s life easier.

            We are trained to not do busy work if that makes sense, and it’s not busy work if management honestly tells you that they need X, regardless how right or wrong they are.

    • hperrin@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Meanwhile, idiot leadership jobs are the best suited to be taken over by AI.

    • Boomer Humor Doomergod@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago
      1. Programmers invent AI
      2. Executives use AI to replace programmers
      3. Executives rehire programmers for thousands of dollars an hour to fix AI mistakes.
  • meliante@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    We’re still far away from Al replacing programmers. Replacing other industries, sure.

    Right, it’s the others that are cooked.

  • 74 183.84@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I once asked chatGPT to write a simple RK2 algorithm in python. The function couldve been about 3 lines followed by a return statement. It gave me some convoluted code that was 3 functions and about 20 lines. AI still has some time to go before its can handle writing code on its own. Ive asked copilot/chatGPT several times to write code (just for fun) and it always does this

  • jmaris@europe.pub
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    People who think AI will replace X job either don’t understand X job or don’t understand AI.

    • boonhet@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Yeah, particularly with CEOs. People don’t understand that in an established company (not a young startup), the primary role of the CEO is to take blame for unpopular decisions and resign or be fired so it would seem like the company is changing course.

      • trolololol@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Ha I never thought of CEOs this way but now so many things make sense. Especially things being exactly as they were when CEOs change, but with a mountain of meaningless changes that never do any good.

        Not that I ever thought they know what they were doing, but now I get what they’re used for.

        • boonhet@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Yup. It’s kinda my conspiracy theory, but also, it’s really not, it’s like a public secret at this point.

          They don’t get these huuuuge golden parachutes for nothing. They get it precisely because they need to take the fall at some point, and if the fall is big enough, they might not even get a new job at a similar level.

          It’s a disgusting system, but I’m not trying to absolve CEOs of anything here. They very much know what they’re getting into when they sign contracts for tens of millions per year in total comp, with generous exit packages. I’m just saying that’s why companies won’t replace them with AI, or even just cheaper proven leaders, any time soon, despite the fact that no CEO is worth the amount of money they make, in actual productivity.

    • dream_weasel@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      For basically everyone at least 9 in 10 people you know are… bless their hearts…not winning a nobel prize any time soon.

      My wife works a people-facing job, and I could never do it. Most people don’t understand most things. That’s not to say most people don’t know anything, but there are not a lot of polymaths out and about.

  • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I’ve always said as a software developer that our longterm job is to program ourselves out of a job. In fact, in the long term EVERYBODY is “cooked” as automation becomes more and more capable. The eventual outcome will be that nobody will have to work. AI in its present state isn’t ready at all to replace programmers, but it can be a very helpful assistant.

    • DarkenLM@kbin.earth
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Management can’t blame AI when shit hits the fan, though. We’ll be fine. Either that or everything just collapses back into dust, which doesn’t sound so bad in the current times.

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        That’s the beauty of AI tho - AI shit rolls uphill, until it hits the manager who imposed the decision to use it (or their manager, or even their manager).

    • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      but it can be a very helpful assistant.

      can, but usually when stuff gets slightly more complex, being a fast typewriter is usually more efficient and results in better code.

      I guess it really depends on the aspiration for code-quality, complexity (yes it’s good at generating boilerplate). If I don’t care about a one-time use script that is quickly written in a prompt I’ll use it.

      Working on a big codebase, I don’t even get the idea to ask an AI, you just can’t feed enough context to the AI that it’s really able to generate meaningful code…

        • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Ughh I tried the gemini model and I’m not too happy with the code it came up with, there’s a lot of intrinsities and concepts that the model doesn’t grasp enough IMO. That said I’ll reevaluate this continuously converting large chunks of code often works ok…

      • Lovable Sidekick@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        I actually don’t write code professionally anymore, I’m going on what my friend says - according to him he uses chatGPT every day and it’s a big help. Once he told it to refactor some code and it used a really novel approach he wouldn’t have thought of. He showed it to another dev who said the same thing. It was like, huh, that’s a weird way to do it, but it worked. But in general you really can’t just tell an AI “Create an accounting system” or whatever and expect coherent working code without thoroughly vetting it.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Lmfao I love these threads. “I haven’t built anything myself with the thing I’m claiming makes you obsolete but trust me it makes you obsolete”

      • 13igTyme@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Today’s “AI” is just a buzz word for Machine learning code. ML has been around for a few decades and has been used in predictive analytics for those same decades.

        A machine that automates a job in a factory does one thing and never changes from that. It doesn’t learn and doesn’t make adjustments. When talking about “AI” no one is talking about the robot arm in a factory that does 5 total movements and repeats endlessly.

  • Wanpieserino@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    My mate is applying to Amazon as warehouse worker. He has an IT degree.

    My coworker in the bookkeeping department has two degrees. Accountancy and IT. She can’t find an IT job.

    At the other side though, my brother, an experienced software developer, is earning quite a lot of money now.

    Basically, the industry is not investing in new blood.

    • Miaou@jlai.lu
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Not sure how you manage to draw conclusions by comparing two different fields.

    • fuck_u_spez_in_particular@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Basically, the industry is not investing in new blood.

      Yeah I think it makes sense out of an economic motivation. Often the code-quality of a junior is worse than that of an AI, and a senior has to review either, so they could just directly prompt the junior task into the AI.

      The experience and skill to quickly grasp code and intention (and having a good initial idea where it should be going architecturally) is what is asked, which is obviously something that seniors are good at.

      It’s kinda sad that our profession/art is slowly dying out because juniors are slowly replaced by AI.

      • Terrasque@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I’ve been seeing the same. Purely economically it doesn’t make sense with junior developers any more. AI is faster, cheaper and usually writes better code too.

        The problem is that you need junior developers working and getting experience, otherwise you won’t get senior developers. I really wonder how development as a profession will be in 10 years

      • boonhet@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        1 year ago

        My company was desperate to find a brand new dev straight out of the oven we could still mold to our sensibilities late last year when everything seemed doomed. Yes, it was one hire out of like 10 interviewed candidates, but point is, there are companies still hiring. Our CTO straight up judges people who use an LLM and don’t know how the code actually works. Mr. “Just use an AI agent” would never get the job.

  • some_guy@lemmy.sdf.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    The best part is how all programmers at Google, Apple, and Microsoft have been fired and now everything is coded by AI. This guy seems pretty smart.

    • PersnickityPenguin@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      There actually isn’t a single human programmer in the entire world. Every single one was fired and replaced by Grok, ChatGPT and Deepseek.

      I know all my old friends who worked at Microsoft are now janitors!