• cimbazarov@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    8
    ·
    edit-2
    20 hours ago

    I think replacing coders with AI is still ways away. But if your boss is saying thats what he wants to do, then you should consider your days numbered. I think one of the aims of AI is that you can have less skilled workers be productive with them and thus don’t require experienced engineers which are rarer and have higher wages. I see it kind of like how the automotive industry’s technological advancements “de-skilled” workers and thus you not only didnt need highly skilled workers, but you could also get away with hiring less workers. AI is not one-to-one with the assembly line though so this isnt a predetermined outcome.

    Now I don’t think less-skilled worker = low performer. Low performers at these companies are just people that can’t politically defend their jobs. I really hate the term because it always comes up as a point of contention when talking about unionizing (in any industry) and it just serves to divide workers. It’s so obvious to me because “low performer” is only used for describing workers at the bottom of the company hierarchy and never at the leadership level.

    I do like though that Zuckerberg is just saying the quiet part out loud for why capitalists are investing so much money into AI. If anything it just makes the contradictions of capitalism easier to point out.

  • amemorablename@lemmygrad.ml
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    11
    ·
    22 hours ago
    • Replace entry level work with AI, but experienced engineers waste more time fixing the slop

    • Save money on training new people

    • Over time, lose experienced engineers to normal human things, like aging and abnormal things like asking them to do the job of five people

    • Realize you need to train new people in order to get experienced engineers

    • Systems are too big to fail and nobody knows how to work on them

    • Pick a random group out of a hat to scapegoat with the blame for it

    (I actually wrote this before I read the bit about “low-performers” but it does track with the idea of entry level. They would inherently performance worse and they’re the only ones where AI replacement would make any logistical sense in the short-term; setting aside longer-term consequences as outlined above.)

  • takeda@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    10
    ·
    1 day ago

    I wonder how long before this bubble bursts.

    They have solution that can replace software engineers, but still can’t figure out how get rid of bots.