> The general sentiment (largely driven by clicks and engagement) is that AI can fully replace developers
I push back on the idea that that’s the general sentiment. Or that there were sentiments that AGI was around the corner until GPT-5.
I just do not believe there are serious, professional people who truly believe AI has the ability to fully replace developers.
Linkedin and even substack can be a place of hyperboles for engagement farming.
I see that recently, the opposite has been happening, where people proclaim AGI boosters and job replacement believers are wrong! As if there are plenty of true AGI boosters and job replacement believers to begin with…
We're definitely seeing a shift, but this has been the sentiment for a long time especially among non-technical people.
You're right that anyone using AI to code in a production setting will quickly see its flaws, but the people making decisions about head count, etc. are not those people.
We might have very information circles, but I truly believe that the vast of majority of “people making decisions about headcount” have never believed or cared for AGI / AI coders. AI is a popular excuse to do massive layoffs for the last two years, regardless of whether AI itself is leading to productivity. Wall street loves when execs talk about AI, and execs love letting people go to improved short-term quarterly earnings. AI might as well be a new shade of paint on these corporate walls, and the headcount decisions would’ve been the same.
> The general sentiment (largely driven by clicks and engagement) is that AI can fully replace developers
I push back on the idea that that’s the general sentiment. Or that there were sentiments that AGI was around the corner until GPT-5.
I just do not believe there are serious, professional people who truly believe AI has the ability to fully replace developers.
Linkedin and even substack can be a place of hyperboles for engagement farming.
I see that recently, the opposite has been happening, where people proclaim AGI boosters and job replacement believers are wrong! As if there are plenty of true AGI boosters and job replacement believers to begin with…
We're definitely seeing a shift, but this has been the sentiment for a long time especially among non-technical people.
You're right that anyone using AI to code in a production setting will quickly see its flaws, but the people making decisions about head count, etc. are not those people.
We might have very information circles, but I truly believe that the vast of majority of “people making decisions about headcount” have never believed or cared for AGI / AI coders. AI is a popular excuse to do massive layoffs for the last two years, regardless of whether AI itself is leading to productivity. Wall street loves when execs talk about AI, and execs love letting people go to improved short-term quarterly earnings. AI might as well be a new shade of paint on these corporate walls, and the headcount decisions would’ve been the same.