Post

I’ve gotten this a couple times so one thing to clear up: At this point I think AI coding is akin to having a new compiler, and the language is just natural text (often specs). LLMs do not currently have the capability to make good engineering decisions past a certain level of complexity

RoombaRider@pfoxen.bsky.social

Software devs who use an LLM for all the coding are more accurately called "customers" Since that's not their work and they're just pushing their responsibility onto something else.

I have no idea if this changes, but if we froze progress here, I’d say the job is far from dead, it just involves a new higher level programming language

1 repost100 likes

I’d also wager that getting AI to do good work in any profession requires the same level of domain expertise to check and guide the work, eg law

I asked the exact same question at the start of my career in the 1970s: why can't we designed a compiler that compiles sufficiently complete functional specification. That was back in the days when we actually wrote complete functional specs before coding, and "sufficiently" is doing a lot of work.

I’ve seen people who don’t have engineering backgrounds be able to prompt their way to creating an output that looks like what they think they want. The problem is that if you look under the hood, it’s not well-architected, and there’s lots of issues with the code.

I’m worried that what may happen is that execs start seeing non-technical employees start turning these things out, think it’s good enough because they don’t know the right questions to ask, and then start questioning why they employ expensive engineers who take longer

my intuition is that if models froze here, we could spend at least a full decade fundamentally reconfiguring the entire practice of software development. maybe two. a much bigger step change in fundamentals than anything that happened in the cloud era there's just too much juice in the lemon