you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[+] -20 points 1 day ago (44 children)

I work in software. Have for 29 years. There will be no one writing software very soon. Like it or not, seems the ship has sailed. The company I work for has a goal of 100% AI generated code within the next 18 months. So might as well give these kids an A, I guess. It's not going back to the old way.

  • source
  • hideshow 44 child comments
  • [–] 26 points 1 day ago (3 children)

    How soon are we talking? Tons of people reject AI, and they continue making software.

    I'm sure even in companies things are going to change, as it's already not cheaper to make software with AI, not to mention the technical debt they're building with nobody understanding the code largely produced by AI. Sure, as much as I want it, AI is probably not going to go away completely, but it's going to swing back hard in the other direction.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [+] -11 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    not to mention the technical debt they're building with nobody understanding the code largely produced by AI.

    Swap AI with humans and this statement continues to be true.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 14 points 1 day ago (21 children)

    why can't we syndicate them out, now, so your kids can actually program?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 21 child comments
  • [+] -22 points 1 day ago (20 children)

    Why would I want my kids to code at this point? AI codes better already. This isn't like John Henry and the steam engine. This is John Henry vs. a space ship.

    Why? That's an easy one. Money. AI does it "better" and faster, according to pointy hair bosses that don't care they've given every employee a nuke without a safety. Love the downvotes. I am working in this biz right now. Believe or don't believe it. It's already coming and practically here. I have not written code in the last 12 months and I am evaluated on how much AI I have used. We are pruning people that are not using it or willing to learn how to use it. You won't stop it. I won't stop it and certainly the government is not going to stop it. We can rage all we want. This is here now. It's not going anywhere.

    AI has better test coverage. Less bugs and vulnerabilities. Way faster. especially when a company uses a proper AI Software Development Lifecycle. Not better than humans by a little. By factors. And is probably the scariest thing in my orbit right now. Every company adopting this is only concerned about beating their competitor. So all notion of safely is completely out the window.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 20 child comments
  • [–] 31 points 1 day ago* (2 children)

    Why would I want my kids to code at this point?

    Because you want your children to learn the value and joy of creative expression? To learn the ability to solve problems -- of any discipline, not just software -- for themselves? To give them the ability to think critically and protect themselves in an increasingly hostile world? To feel the satisfaction and confidence boost of overcoming a difficult challenge?

    I don't know you, I don't even know if you have kids or if this is just a rhetorical argument. But still, you don't value any of your 30 years of experience enough to pass that knowledge on to a new generation? Because that's what you're telling us, and it doesn't have anything to do with AI. That's what we in the business call a You problem. You can feel defeated, that's normal and I sympathize with it, but you can leave your capitulation at the door. Those kids deserve better.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [+] -7 points 1 day ago (1 child)

    Because you want your children to learn the value and joy of creative expression? To learn the ability to solve problems -- of any discipline, not just software -- for themselves? To give them the ability to think critically and protect themselves in an increasingly hostile world? To feel the satisfaction and confidence boost of overcoming a difficult challenge?

    It is possible to do all of this without needing to teach any coding skills whatsoever. I'd even argue that, given the current state of affairs, teaching these important and valuable life lessons in a way that does not involve software would be the greater value.

    There is a difference between the lesson and the medium. The point that is being made is that software development may not be the best choice as a medium to carry these kinds of lessons going forward. Would you, during the early hay days of the printing press, want to teach your children to take pride in themselves for their hard-won excellence in manual text transcription?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 11 points 1 day ago

    Well we're already in agreement that programming is merely one medium, but with AI being used as a replacement for just about any form of human expression - audiovisual arts, writing, mathematics, information sciences, etc - all mediums are under the same looming threat. So if we're giving up on one medium, we're gonna be giving up on most of them. And without them, we can't really pass on those lessons. Learning doesn't exist in the abstract, we also have to put those lessons into practice. If OP wasn't a programmer but a musician, let's say, then I'd have the same admittedly harsh reaction. I don't see any reason to doompost about the end of programming, or the end of music, or the end of learning.

    Finally, I don't really know where you're going with the printing press analogy? Like, yes? I want children to take pride in themselves for any skill they practice and enjoy? But the printing press isn't really analogous to AI, for a number of reasons:

    • LLM's, by their nature, produce an output that is of the same type as its inputs: text begets text, images beget images, etc. As such, you can make LLM's generate their own instructions and feed that back into it. As we know from the Claude Code leaks, Anthropic was doing just that, using CC to ask C to work on CC.

    • Printing presses did not create more... printing presses. They created more print. Not even more words, the press itself didn't conjure Martin Luther's 95 theses into existence, it just copied an existing text. Which makes it a useful addition to our ability to create, not an outright replacement.

    • Printing presses were still human operated machines, requiring knowledge of its inner workings to maintain, repair, and operate. They're not agentic, self-sustaining systems. Though you could argue that even AI is not self-sustaining, once its power grid fails. By the by, the printing press didn't threaten global ecological catastrophe all on its own.

    • Printing presses did not, in fact, extinguish the pencil. Schools do still teach kids how to write. Heck, humble brag time, even I get compliments on my penmanship from time to time, and I write in all capital letters!

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 12 points 1 day ago

    https://www.theguardian.com/technology/2026/oct/13/ai-companies-rushed-workers-fallout

    https://futurism.com/artificial-intelligence/shopify-ceo-ai-workplace-staff-horrified-backfire

    While I definitely don't disagree with you that our illustrious CEO's and MBA executives are always looking to get rid of us blood filled cost accounts, it would seem that a lot of companies are finding out that AI isn't the savior they thought it was.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 21 points 1 day ago (11 children)

    That sounds like why would I want my kids to learn math. Calculators do it better anyways.

    Why would I want my kids to learn to write. LLMs do it faster anyways.

    Reason schools teach the basics before letting students using the shortcuts is to first develop the foundations needed to know what is going on.

    So even if they aren't doing anything as machines do it they can still oversee what is going on if errors occur, which someone who doesn't know anything at all wouldn't be able to do. And if someome with no understanding without AI can do it then the human isn't needed at all at that point.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago (8 children)

    Given how many people fail learning from history, I can see why WasabiWabbit@lemmy.ca decided to betray his class. The foundations of class consciousness doesn't exist. So we’ll continue repeating the poem of history.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 day ago (7 children)

    Two questions for you:

    1. What behavior, if any, would you consider appropriate here?
    2. What have you done (other than posting hate-filled comments on Lemmy) to further your cause?
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 22 hours ago (6 children)
    1. irt WasabiWabbit or Australian STEM Videogame Challenge?

    other than posting hate-filled comments on Lemmy

    2.a) I refute these claims. 2.b) liberate games

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 20 hours ago (5 children)
  • [–] 1 point 18 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (4 children)
    1. What about WasabiWabbit’s behavior do you claim is in/appropriate here? We just share differences in praxis on how we want to see game development in the future.
    2. I claim I contribute to liberating games, recompiling efforts, modifying, etc.. Osgameclones is one of the many projects I contribute to. RN, I am focusing on APE porting a favorite game of mines.
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 5 hours ago (3 children)

    I can see why WasabiWabbit@lemmy.ca decided to betray his class.

    So not only a treasonous class traitor, but also an accelerationist without an ounce morality and hope for a future.

    Good luck in foodbanks.

    That's some pretty strong disagreement...

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 0 points 4 hours ago (2 children)

    Yeah, but not inappropriate behavior, just disappointing. I have class consciousness. People hired in game studios seem are hired based on how class treacherous they are. WasabiWabbit proved he’s not beyond grifting future programming.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] -5 points 1 day ago*

    the human isn't needed at all at that point.

    Yes. This is the point they were making. On the current trajectory, and very soon to boot, many tasks — like writing code — will be entirely automated. That is exactly the goal of nearly every corporate player with any skin in this game, and for better or worse, it looks like this will indeed come to pass.

    What value that leaves for human endeavor and understanding in these areas is an important but entirely separate matter.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 7 points 1 day ago

    We are pruning people that are not using it or willing to learn how to use it. You won’t stop it. I won’t stop it and certainly the government is not going to stop it.

    Got it. So not only a treasonous class traitor, but also an accelerationist without an ounce morality and hope for a future.

    Good luck in foodbanks.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] -4 points 1 day ago

    Thank you for being the adult in the room. I appreciate it even if others cannot.

    It's really disheartening to see people on here not only consistently fail to understand what is happening in the world around them, but also go on to tar and feather anyone who tries to give them an informed perspective.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 6 points 1 day ago (10 children)

    Another software engineer of 25 years here. I'm really surprised to see how badly you've been downvoted here for simply telling the truth. I suspect anyone who downvoted you either hasn't used a paid frontier AI model to write code (so they think the free browser-based models are as good as it gets), assumes you're pro-AI, or simply jumps on the AI-bad-downvote train.

    For anyone that downvoted, tell us, why? Let's have a conversation about it. Us software engineers are on the bleeding edge of this seismic shift. We're seeing firsthand what it's capable of, and how fast it's improving. It doesn't mean we're in favour of the AI companies, or ram shortages, or data centers being rolled out in your backyard, or being turned into engineering team leads overnight. It's been thrust into our lives just like yours, but if we don't use it we're throwing away a massive productivity boost and one of the most transformative technologies of the last few decades.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 5 points 18 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

    It's a rare opportunity for someone to actually ask for a conversation, so let's have one.

    • First of all, "no one writing software" taken literally, is simply not true. People still write in all sorts of obsolete / obscure programming languages, mostly for fun, though occasionally there's reasons why one might want to in a real world scenario. To me, code is art. You cannot stop art.

    • If we're talking figuratively, when it comes to the "professional" software development. I'm not familiar with this side of things, but here's my opinion: A lot of the industry has been churning out slop long before AI became a thing. Keeping the gears turning. Making changes nobody's asked for. Buying up and destroying smaller companies. All in the name of profit and infinite growth. This is bad, AI or not.

    • From what I've seen, you at the very least still need experienced programmers to review and guide the AI, otherwise you'll quickly run into unmaintainable, possibly insecure code. But proliferating AI coding will lead to nobody building that experience.

    • "Insecure code? But just let AI write test cases and review it for security flaws!" It might be good at catching some errors humans make when writing code, but if you spin this to its extreme, you will end up with AI cheating to satisfy the security tests, rather than actually writing secure code.

    • And you say productivity, but all I see is waste. Many people on your side of the fence desperately want to avoid having to label your "work" as being made with AI, because it's not a good look. People don't want slopware. AI is good at creating things quickly. To make a lot of noise, drowning out the signal. But in the end it's just something flashy without substance or longevity.

    • AI is great if you want people further driven away from their fellow humans and into content addiction, with a short attention span, that can barely think for themselves. In the end, it's the perfect tool for fascism.

    • So, ask yourself: Who actually benefits from this?

    I'm not rejecting all that (generative) AI can do. There's certainly some cases where it appears to be useful as a tool, in the right hands, for the right context. But the post you're defending is pushing things to an extreme. And would you know, AI companies themselves are just as extreme. It's a figurative suicide cult, if not a literal one.

    I could go on. And I'm a bit all over the place. But anyway, this is why you're experiencing a lot of pushback in some online spaces.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 18 hours ago

    I see this sentiment constantly and I've yet to actually see a single example of AI generated codebase that I'd consider on par with anything but a mediocre one written by humans. You want me to appraise the quality of a product? Show me something that's high quality, 'cause all I can see right now is billions being poured into products racing from incoherence towards mediocrity.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 23 hours ago (4 children)

    I don't agree with this standpoint but I have a genuine question for you and the others in this thread, assuming you're right: what should we be teaching kids, instead of coding? If the norm becomes not writing code by hand, what would the degree look like that gets you into one of these AI jockey jobs? Do we still teach DSA? Design patterns? Does Programming: AT&T to 3 == "3" get a one-lecture spotlight between punchcard machines and transformer architectures?

    Or in the long run are you expecting that the entire software industry will essentially become a nontechnical one, and just be middle managers building things directly?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 20 hours ago

    Systems, design patterns, technical experience, and just what good looks like. You need to know how the sausage is made, because you can't get the best results from an AI model without knowing when the result is good.

    And that's actually really hard without experience, community, and ongoing criticism and learning.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 22 hours ago (2 children)

    Hey thanks for replying! It's a great question, and one I don't have a good answer for.

    My immediate gut instinct is that we SHOULD still be teaching kids coding, and everything else that was on their curriculum previously. Just as calculators helped us work faster, we still want to understand what they're doing. Even if AI can augment or replace some of our knowledge in future, it's still important to think for yourself and be able to vet what you're generating with AI. But this is an answer built around what's happening right now, not tomorrow.

    When I think about an answer in relation to my experience over the last year, it feels a lot more hopeless, at least to me. I don't think we're going to know what adults should be focusing on in the short term, let alone what kids are learning for their future careers.

    The situation is changing so rapidly in my workplace (at least for software engineers) that AI workflows we were using 3 months ago feel ancient. By not being on the latest frontier model, we're losing productivity. We're all rolling our own custom software to speed up our personal workflows. It's faster and cheaper to do this in many cases than to buy an off-the-shelf product and learn/master it.

    So already, I feel like the days of companies selling software subscriptions feels very numbered. Adobe and Atlassian are going to have their business model completely destroyed IMHO. But that's not even the scary part.

    Have a look at the number of Linux CVEs found this year compared to previous years - it's humbling. Governments are paying very close attention, and export controls on AI models are in full swing. They're very capable cyberweapons.

    So the future I'm seeing is an incredibly uncertain one for everyone due to the exponential nature of it all, both from a geopolitics standpoint as well as a career standpoint for many industries. Last year I thought we were somewhere through the hype cycle and it was starting to slow down, but now I've had more hands on experience with the frontier models, these days I'm thinking we're still at the beginning of an exponential curve, an explosion of change that's going to happen so fast many of us will struggle to cope, and our slow legal and economic systems will struggle to keep up.

    I think a lot of people are just assuming it'll all blow over once the bubble pops, but like all the other bubbles, it's formed because there is a very real technological leap happening, and it's not going away.

    So right now I've never been more sure of one thing: that it's harder than ever to see what's coming. So to try and answer your question just feels impossible, it's all still moving too fast.

    Perhaps on reflection one thing we should be teaching our kids is the importance of continued learning and bettering ones self. I fear the world is in for a rough decade from all this (not to mention climate change and late-stage capitalism), and anything we can do to prepare our kids to roll with the punches in that future would be wise.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 21 hours ago* (last edited 18 hours ago) (1 child)

    Thanks for such a detailed response. I suppose asking you to essentially predict the future of this particular industry was a bit ambitious.

    My immediate gut instinct is that we SHOULD still be teaching kids coding

    As is mine, which for me I think, even if I take it as read that LLMs are the future of programming, comes from the same place that makes me think in spite of Python, programming courses should start with C. But it's become pretty obvious to me that a lot of people don't have that desire to "go under the hood", and still seem to manage, so part of me thinks maybe the same will become true of LLM users.

    these days I’m thinking we’re still at the beginning of an exponential curve

    a lot of people are just assuming it’ll all blow over once the bubble pops, but like all the other bubbles, it’s formed because there is a very real technological leap happening, and it’s not going away

    I'm one of the people you called out who "hasn't used a paid frontier AI model to write code" (though I didn't downvote), so I have to take your word for it re the rate of change, but it does seem a little contradictory to me to believe we're on an exponential slope but also in a bubble. I guess the former is from a technological perspective and the latter financial?

    Have a look at the number of Linux CVEs found this year compared to previous years - it’s humbling.

    That's one of the things that has pushed me away from the intensely skeptical end of the spectrum. But I don't really see how this can fail to flatten out eventually. While secure software is possible at all (by which I suppose I mean cryptography, hardware, and airgaps still work as advertised), I think if anything AI will simply accelerate us towards an equilibrium, where the supply of vulnerabilities that can be found by LLM-guided brute force search is patched and exhausted.

    I fear the world is in for a rough decade from all this ... and anything we can do to prepare our kids to roll with the punches in that future would be wise.

    Pretty bleak. But I definitely agree.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 20 hours ago

    Regarding the frontier models, there's a idea called Karpathy's Funnel which notes the massive difference in experience with AI models. It funnels the population of the world like this: (borrowing a lot from a Karpathy tweet with some paraphrasing)

    • 6B people (~75% of the population) have barely come in contact with LLMs.
    • 1-2B (~20%) are casual and infrequent users of free-tier ChatGPT-like products. This group sees derpy chatbots and AI slop, to this part of the world the whole thing feels crazy still.
    • 20M people (0.2%) see frontier-grade LLMs, complex projects that used to take them weeks/months can now be completed by agents with a prompt. You typically need a budget to get this experience. There are multiple levels in this tier as well from those that use 'open-weight' models to expensive monsters like Claude Fable. Models are Powerful tools at this level.
    • 5k People (~0.00006%) have access to frontier-grade systems internally inside AI labs, they have the budget to put the frontier on automatic, spin up hundreds of agents, and burn their huge salary's worth in tokens.

    At these lower tiers of the funnel, they believe in the future the AI companies promise because they've literally bought in enough to actually get the experience.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 4 points 20 hours ago (1 child)

    I think it's worth remembering that most of humanity hasn't been involved in anything resembling meaningful productive work for many decades.

    From this, we can conclude that the general state of our society, including education, will not be impacted by the introduction of AI, it already sucks.

    We didn't 'start failing our children' in 2027, we started failing them in 1927, and more likely we have never NOT failed to educate people in how to not suck.

    I wish more people of good conscience would take changes and work towards applying them meaningfully instead of letting the absolute worst people take maximum advantage of whatever advantage could be had of whatever change is coming.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 0 points 10 hours ago* (last edited 10 hours ago)

    There's a lot to unpack here, and the TLDR is that his comment is one huge doompost, and your comment is one large concern troll. I'm engaging with it anyway, not because you'll read this, but someone else may.

    First, the guy above us has basically suffered a depressive episode. "Might as well give the kids an A" and "the ship has sailed" and "no one will write software anymore." These are defeatist attitudes. Maybe the guy just needs a place to vent his frustrations and doesn't have anyone close to him. But in my opinion, sharing these thoughts out loud sets a bad example both as a senior engineer and as a role model for children and students of any kind. It's giving up, it's quitting, and it's demoralizing. I believe he should have kept that to himself, unless this was a cry for help, in which case this is all the help I can provide and the only way I know how.

    Second, the person I'm replying to leveled a lot of logical fallacies, real "Flood The Zone With Shit" shit. We got to start with the Appeal To Authority. Tenure is not the mark of an effective leader, but it's all they can offer. 25 and 30 year engineers also puts them at about 55 to 65 years old, nearing retirement. They are not invested in the future of the industry, they are on the cusp of leaving it behind. So even if they were who they say they were, why should I believe them?

    We also have a lot of Strawmen. "Downvoters have never used an AI before," has the same energy as "Cryptocurrency haters have never minted an NFT before," implying that AI resistance is founded on ignorance. "He's just telling the truth," is also really sneaky, because it primes us to take it at face value as fact. But it's just like, an opinion maaan. "We'd be throwing away a massive productivity boost" is just straight up propaganda, may as well have just copy pasted Sam Altman for that one.

    So now here's from my experience. If you're willing to take my word for it, I'm a 10-year engineer who's been using Opus and Fable at work. Here's how AI changed our company:

    • Productivity is not up, we are still beholden to clients who demand time to preview the releases. Management has forced us to cram more features into a given release, causing the clients to delay so they can reevaluate it. End result, we ship fewer features in a given month, not more.
    • Despite all this extra work being done, we still are working 40 plus hours a week.
    • Team morale is way down, as everyone believes that the only reason we're using it this much is because management wants to lay people off.
    • Engineers are starting to snap at each other for trying to ask questions about new features, and the new favorite catch phrase of all is "I don't know, have you asked Claude?"
    • 32,000 line merge requests are now the norm. The bulk of that is unit tests that failed to account for basic UX: is it "nice" to use the software? These code reviews will inevitably let some large vulnerability through, so most code reviewers are taking longer to review so that they don't get the blame.
    • Engineers are getting lazier writing their skill files and prompts, leading to increased churn. They're using AI to write the skills that AI will ingest, leading to generational decay.
    • I now have to scrutinize the output of engineers that I used to value and respect, and after multiple iterations of code reviews with them, they begin to take it personally. This destroys our team cohesion and camaraderie.
    • Engineers are burning through their token allotments so fast that they are now twiddling their thumbs for an entire sprint until it can replenish. Management cannot decide if this is a good thing or a bad thing and are now so confused that they are hitting people with the carrot.

    So... I said it before and I'll say it again. THIS is the trillion dollar technology? It makes a bunch of people more tired, more angry, more scared, and more alone.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 2 points 20 hours ago* (1 child)

    2 decades game dev exp -- yup. and there's lot of software out there already thats production ready which will pump out game assets off of word prompts. hell they will spit out full games. people have gone from creators to reviewers.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 4 hours ago*

    https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.scenario.apps.mockingjay

    The GenAI Engine for Gaming

    Welcome to Scenario: The genAI engine that's reshaping the game development world! 🚀

    Effortlessly craft consistent, top-notch assets like characters, props, environments, and more.

    Reach unmatched consistency and productivity in your game development process and unlock unparalleled graphics and design capabilities with Scenario’s features:

    Train AI models to align with your unique style and art direction effortlessly. Upload your style, let the AI learn, and generate images that resonate with your vision.

    Experience advanced image generation in a user-friendly interface where AI meets art. Refine, remove backgrounds, pixelate and upscale your images seamlessly.

    Gain precision over your visuals with Composition Control (ControlNet). With various modes like Structure, Depth, and Line Art, Scenario bridges the gap between AI's unpredictability and game artists' needs, offering unsurpassed creative flexibility.

  • source
  • parent
  • [+] -6 points 1 day ago (3 children)