Post #2502775
2026-05-13 17:28 UTC
Replies (5)
-
@scrubbles@poptalk.scrubbles.tech 2026-05-13 17:49
This is the only sane answer here, and it makes sense because of the sentiment on Lemmy. There is one constant rule about software engineering. You must be adaptable. The career is ever changing, you need to be okay with that. I think a lot of people right now are finding out that if they dig in their heels they think they’re making a point, but the company doesn’t care, there’s the door. AI is just another change in the career. Adapt, or be left behind. The job isn’t the same as it was 5 years ago, which also was different than it was 10 years before that, and then 10 years before that. I’ll say this is a large change, but that’s the job. I think the biggest thing is there’s no room for “I’m a react engineer” anymore. Everyone needs to be everything, and it means learn as much as you can as fast as you can. You must be a “T-shaped” engineer. Wide breadth, with specific deep knowledge that makes you stand out. You can be an expert at react, but should also know how to code in the backend, and how to deploy, how to work with APIs, some basic cloud architecture. If you’re not learning, you’re falling behind.
-
@nymnympseudonym@piefed.social 2026-05-13 17:57
If you have AI generate all of your code, you’re going to have a bad time I agree with “all”, but the percentage AI can do usefully is increasing quickly and depends a lot on your having written down and documented everything the super-smart-sometimes-hallucinating new employee needs to know.
-
@chahn.chris@piefed.social 2026-05-13 18:28
Just like human code generation, you need to review what’s being generated. AI can speed up the writing of code but humans need to review it. Even if it’s always right humans doing a review will help generate new useful ideas for future improvements. Having AI do everything isn’t good, but using it to augment the process is incredible.
-
@emmy5482@quokk.au 2026-05-13 21:55
Ah the centrist approach. 🙄
-
@Guttural@jlai.lu 2026-05-14 00:25
Or AI usage might become too expensive as energy costs rise, datacenter equipment becomes more expensive, monopolies emerge, investor funding dries up. Putting all ethical concerns aside, the bad code written by ClaudeGPT could also finally cause a software quality decrease and explode in the faces of the companies using them, making any velocity gains dubious. Services may also start enshittifying. There’s also the legal aspect which is not fully settled. The dependence on US companies which might not remain OK forever in the rest of the world. It is to be noted that, while programmers and executives are claiming they see gains, the science is not settled. Studies so far seem to indicate the contrary is observed in practice, although it remains to be seen if it stays that way in the future because, apparently, results got way better with Claude Whatever 4.6. I’m not predicting a collapse, just saying these are plausible scenarios. And if any of them comes true, even if there’s no collapse, there will be a spot for actual software engineers that refused to use it all along and remained sharp, and they won’t be “left in the dust”.