the future of software engineering seems uncontroversially prompting + code review. startups will skip the code review because they’re racing against time. larger/serious orgs will take code review very seriously.
llms can do code review, but my guess is that because they have to search through large space, it will be as expensive to have say mythos review your code as it would be to have a senior dev.
based on budget:
$: prompting only
$$: low grade llm review
$$$: mid grade llm + dev review
$$$$: high grade llm + sr dev review
btw, software (past the bootstrapping phase) will get more expensive to make and take more time. quality will remain exactly the same as when humans were doing it: shit.
> be a software engineer
> tell everyone “we’re cooked”
> post about ai layoffs
that have nothing to do with ai
> nobody will study cs
> programmers will switch jobs
> congrats, in 5 years software will have a demand spike with no supply because “ai was gonna replace us all”
Yes, these agents are absolutely horrible at writing decent-quality code.
But any time you say that out loud, there's a swarm of AI-apologists who've never built anything that scream at you, "skill issue!"
You might not care about the code, and that's alright, but you can't gaslight anyone who cares about good code.
There are a lot of great reasons to have kids.
But perhaps the best one is you can brainwash them to enjoy all the video games you enjoy, and then you have a built-in LAN party at your house every night.
We’re excited to announce that Pudgy World, our free to play browser-based game, is now live.
Explore 12 unique towns across The Berg, help Pengu find Polly, and play mini-games, all on @PudgyWorld_.
Play now: https://t.co/x7lkMt8Rre
This is how you get dumber btw, true even before AI. Turn on DnD, put your phone in a drawer. The best option if you can is to separate work + personal devices so your work device can't even see personal stuff. This is also partially why Pomodoro was all the rage a decade+ ago.
I have been testing a lot of AI app/gamedev tools lately, and frankly none of them has good enough quality to have any impact. They are focusing way too much on one-shotting to impress investors. But real game-dev is an iterative process. If your AI platform can't beat Roblox UGC games in quality, then your platform will fail. Who's going to spend time playing shit like that if there's better alternatives around? More is not better. Quality is what matters in competitive market. Better quality than Roblox games is the minimal bar. And it can't be 5% better. Nobody will notice that. Needs to be clearly better quality to lure people jump the ship.
Code is cheap, Software is not 🤔
Anyone can write code. Building software that's maintainable, observable, secure, and actually solves a problem? That's the hard part.
This is why fundamentals matter more than ever.
@wookash_podcast It's been 1-3 years since people have been saying this stuff. If they have 10x'd their productivity, that is 10-30 years in traditional developer time. Where is all the softwares that should have been produced by this massive productivity increase?