Most of the smugness around "sure AI can x, but it can't y" is by senior practitioners. I hear from senior software engineers things like "some of these tools can crank out a website on prompt, but can't translate customer specs into architectural decisions which require the nuanced knowledge of 20 years in the field." Pretend that's true for this thread. The rub is: it won't replace senior engineers. If the implication is that the juniors should be concerned, while the retiring class is safe, we have ourselves the equivalent of Japan's "aging population." In other words, for economic purposes it's the wrong end of the river which is at risk. You might say: a premium should be placed on Computer Science over bootcamps; this favors those who take it seriously (software engineering vs "coding"). But that's not the words used by those confident; I've noted always, they are careful to point out years of experience. Trial and error, management and client relations, architectural hard lessons. Not theory and principal; because AI has that.
[link] [comments]