Post #4190340

2026-07-28 18:58 UTC

The consensus (at least on LinkedIn anyhow) is that LLM-driven development is the expected default and is the only commercially viable form of development. Does anybody have any compelling reasons that this is NOT the case? Please note: I'm not asking because I'm looking to have an argument. I'm asking because I feel so utterly fucking hopeless that I will ever be able to get a job as a software developer ever again without having to be forced to use LLMs.

Replies (3)

@laprice@beige.party 2026-07-28 19:13

@xan@xantronix.social LinkedIn consensus is false consensus. People who can build, run and understand systems involving software will never not be needed. But the delusion that they can be dispensed with in favor of automation will continue as long we allow managers who indulge it to fail upwards. The current wave of AI is a management groupthink engineered to disempower one particular group of skilled human workers and will not run it's course until its most vocal proponents are visibly seen to fail. My suggestion is to look at roles where the understanding is required but the label does not say software developer; at least until the OpenAI bankruptcy and sell-off.

Open ##4190339
@kookie@chaosfem.tw 2026-07-28 18:59

@xan@xantronix.social Token costs tripling in the next 5 years when the VC money can no longer be shoveled into the money furnace

Open ##4307764
@dalias@hachyderm.io 2026-07-28 19:02

@xan@xantronix.social LinkedIn is a certain class of right wing brainrotted owner- and management-class shitheads whose opinions are just one big circlejerk. They have no connection to reality and the only part of them that will remain stable from this fad to the next is siding with their billionaire VC masters.

Open ##4307778