• Joe Dyrt@lemmy.ca
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    132
    ·
    1 month ago

    It’s hard for people who haven’t experienced the loss of experts to understand. Not a programmer but I worked in aerospace engineering for 35 years. The drive to transfer value to execs and other stakeholders by reducing the cost of those who literally make that value always ends costing more.

      • shalafi@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        30 days ago

        I’d argue the CEO is the most important person, usually. We see dipshits like Musk and turn around and bag on all of them.

        Think of a business, doesn’t matter if it’s local or national. How do the employees act? Are they happy and seem to be doing useful work? Are they downcast and depressed looking?

        Sometimes it’s the local manager staving off corporate bullshit, but company culture mostly rolls down from the CEO. They saying, “Shit rolls downhill.”, works both ways.

        • QuarterSwede@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          26 days ago

          The CEO and C Suite are the least important people in a company. They can be changed out with relatively little interruption and it takes a lot longer to see the effects. However, you have an on the ground workforce stop producing and the effects are immediate and long lasting.

    • splinter@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      18
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      It’s utterly bizarre. The customers lose out by receiving an inferior product at the same cost. The workers lose out by having their employment terminated. And even the company loses out by having its reputation squandered. The only people who gain are the executives and the ownership.

      • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        17
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        This is absolutely by design. The corporate raider playbook is well-read. See: Sears, Fluke, DeWalt, Boeing, HP, Intel, Anker, any company purchased by Vista (RIP Smartsheet, we barely knew ye), and so on. Find a brand with an excellent reputation, gut it, strip mine that goodwill, abandon the husk on a golden parachute, and make sure to not be the one holding the bag.

          • JayleneSlide@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            28 days ago

            They were acquired by Opta Group in 2023. Since then, the quality has declined while prices increased. And around the time of their acquisition, they started doing some shady stuff when claiming USB-IF compliance. The cables were blatantly not USB-IF compliant.

            Another example: I personally love my Anker GaN Prime power bricks and 737. Unfortunately, among my friends and peers, I am the exception. The Prime chargers are known for incorrectly reading cable eMarkers and then failing to deliver the correct power. This has so far been an issue for me twice, but was able to be worked around.

      • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        30 days ago

        On a more generic scale (whatever that means), we went from coding serious stuff in Ada with contracts and designs and architectures, to throwing everything in the trash while forgetting any kind of pride and responsibility in less than 50 years. AI is the next step in that global engineering enshittification (I hate that word but it’s appropriate).

        Whether AI has a future or not, no one can deny that SWE is an absolute mess of shitty practices. If AI stays as it is, we’re going down with it.

  • Ride Against The Lizard@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    68
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 month ago

    The irony of using an AI generated image for this post…

    AI imagery makes any article look cheaper in my view, I am more inclined to “judge the book by its cover”.

    Why would you slap something so lazy on top of a piece of writing you (assuming it isn’t also written by AI) put time and effort into?

    • pyre@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      21
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      this post is about programmers being replaced by ai. the writer seems ok with artists being replaced.

    • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      15
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I know that it’s a meme to hate on generated images people need to understand just how much that ship has sailed.

      Getting upset at generative AI is about as absurd as getting upset at CGI special effects or digital images. Both of these things were the subject of derision when they started being widely used. CGI was seen as a second rate knockoff of “real” special effects and digital images were seen as the tool of amateur photographers with their Photoshop tools acting as a crutch in place of real photography talent.

      No amount of arguments film purist or nostalgia for the old days of puppets and models in movies was going to stop computer graphics and digital images capture and manipulation. Today those arguments seem so quaint and ignorant that most people are not even aware that there was even a controversy.

      Digital images and computer graphics have nearly completely displaced film photography and physical model-based special effects.

      Much like those technologies, generative AI isn’t going away and it’s only going to improve and become more ubiquitous.

      This isn’t the hill to die on no matter how many upvotes you get.

      • fart@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        people don’t like generated so bc it’s trainer on copyrighted data but if you don’t believe in copyright then it’s a tool like any other

        • FauxLiving@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          There are thousands of different diffusion models, not all of them are trained on copyright protected work.

          In addition, substantially transformative works are allowed to use content that is otherwise copy protected under the fair use doctrine.

          It’s hard to argue that a model, a file containing the trained weight matrices, is in any way substantially similar to any existing copyrighted work. TL;DR: There are no pictures of Mickey Mouse in a GGUF file.

          Fair use has already been upheld in the courts concerning machine learning models trained using books.

          For instance, under the precedent established in Authors Guild v. HathiTrust and upheld in Authors Guild v. Google, the US Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit held that mass digitization of a large volume of in-copyright books in order to distill and reveal new information about the books was a fair use.

          And, perhaps more pragmatically, the genie is already out of the bottle. The software and weights are already available and you can train and fine-tune your own models on consumer graphics cards. No court ruling or regulation will restrain every country on the globe and every country is rapidly researching and producing generative models.

          The battle is already over, the ship has sailed.

          • MHS@lemmy.wtf
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            arrow-down
            2
            ·
            edit-2
            29 days ago

            Exactly!!
            Thank God, you get it.

            This video (which was trending a while ago) explained it pretty well:
            https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pt7GtDMTd3k

            And to add to what you said, people have some huge misunderstandings about how Gen AI work. They think it somehow just copy pastes portions of the art it was trained on, and that’s it. That’s not the case AT ALL, it’s not even close to that.

            AI models should be allowed to be trained on copy righted data. If they shouldn’t be allowed to do that, then humans shouldn’t be allowed to do it either. Why do we give such advice to upcoming writers and musicians and artists, to consume the kind of content that they want to create in the future? To read the kind of books that they want to write like? To listen to the kind of music that they want to create? To look at pieces of art that they want to create? Should humans ALSO be limited to only publuc domain content?? I really don’t think so.

            Again, Gen AI models don’t just copy paste stuff from their training set of data. They understand what makes up that piece of data. Just like a human does.

            Thankfully, reasoning models like Deepseek-R1 have started to show the average person how an AI actually reasons and thinks about things and that they don’t just spew stuff out of nowhere in the hopes that it makes some kind of sense, slapping pieces of their training data set together to write something that’s barely comprehensible. The “Think” tags in such models really helped clarify some huge misunderstandings that some people had. Although, many many people are still left who have a really messed up view of how AIs work, and they somehow speak with such confidence about these topics with no knowledge of the technical details. It drives me nuts.

  • gravitas_deficiency@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    58
    ·
    30 days ago

    As a software engineer, I’m perfectly happy waiting around until they have to re-hire all of us at consulting rates because their tech stacks are falling the fuck apart <3

  • meyotch@slrpnk.net
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    54
    ·
    1 month ago

    This is prophetic and yet as clear as day to anyone who has actually had to rely on their own code for anything.

    I have lately focused all of my tech learning efforts and home lab experiments on cloud-less approaches. Sure the cloud is a good idea for scalable high traffic websites, but it sure also seems to enable police state surveillance and extreme vendor lock-in.

    It’s really just a focus on fundamentals. But all those cool virtualization technologies that enable ‘cloud’ are super handy in a local system too. Rolling back container snapshots on specific services while leaving the general system unimpacted is useful anywhere.

    But it is all on hardware I control. Apropos of the article, the pendulum will swing back toward more focus on local infrastructure. Cloud won’t go away, but more people are realizing that it also means someone else owns your data/your business.

    • Optional@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      19
      ·
      1 month ago

      I think they were suckered in also by the supposed lower cost of running services, which, as it happens, isn’t lower at all and in fact is more expensive. But you laid off the Datacenter staff so. Pay up, suckers.

      Neat toolsets though.

      • lumpybag@reddthat.com
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The cloud provides incredible flexibility, scale, and reliability. It is expensive to have 3+ data centers with a datacenter staff. If the data center was such a great deal for the many 9s of reliability provided by the cloud, company’s would be shifting back in mass at this point

        • Optional@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          11
          ·
          1 month ago

          Oh no way. It was a year(s)-long process to get to the cloud, then the devs got hooked on all the toys AWS was giving them and got strapped in even further. They couldn’t get out now if they wanted to. Not without huge expense and re-writing a bunch of stuff. No CTO is going die on that hill.

          They jumped in the cloud for the same reason they jumped into AI - massive hype. Only the cloud worked. And now % of the profits are all Amazon’s. No app store needed. MuwAHhahahAhahahaa

    • CeeBee_Eh@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      17
      ·
      1 month ago

      There’s also the tribal knowledge of people who’ve worked somewhere for a few years. There’s always a few people who just know where or how a particular thing works and why it works that way. AI simply cannot replace that.

        • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          5
          ·
          30 days ago

          there’s so much negligent work here I swear they did it on purpose.

          Depending on the place, it’s the “work insurance” - companies would usually think twice before firing the only person who can understand the spaghetti. Now they won’t need said person to generate “working” code

    • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      1 month ago

      That’s what I expect if I’m fired and rehired: at least +25% on my salary.

      We hired a junior at work from a prestigious university. He uses ChatGPT all the time but denies it. I know that because all his comments in the code are written like some new Tolkien book. Last time I checked his code, I told him it had something like 20 bugs and told him how to fix that because I’m not a bad guy. The next day, he came back with a program that was very very different. Not knowing how to apply my fixes, he used another prompt and the whole thing was different with new bugs. I told my boss I was not wasting time on that shit again.

    • FatCrab@lemmy.one
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      30 days ago

      Well, also if the guy was just dumping AI generated code arbitrarily into your product, that pretty significantly risks the copyright over the entire product into which the generated stuff was integrated (meaning, anyone can do whatever the fuck they want with it).

        • FatCrab@lemmy.one
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          29 days ago

          I’m an IP attorney whose been pretty specialized in ML-enabled technologies for a decade now, and have worked in-house for fortune 500 companies so I’m pretty familiar with how these queries are often handled, especially at multinats. There honestly probably isn’t someone in your legal with all three of seniority, understanding and keeping up with the legal nuances, and understanding of the underlying technologies. The overlap in my experience is few and far between.

  • schnurrito@discuss.tchncs.de
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    41
    ·
    1 month ago

    Literally anybody who thought about the idea for more than ten seconds already realized this a long time ago; apparently this blog post needed to be written for the people who didn’t do even that…

  • DrFistington@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    25
    ·
    1 month ago

    What most people forget is that as a programmer/designer/etc, your job is to take what your client/customer tells you they want, listen to them, then try to give them what they ACTUALLY NEED, which is something that I think needs to be highlighted. Most people making requests to programmers, don’t really even know what they want, or why they want it. They had some meeting and people decided that, ‘Yes we need the program to do X!’ without realizing that what they are asking for won’t actually get them the result they want.

    AI will be great at giving people exactly what they ask for…but that doesn’t mean its what they actually needed…

    • RedSeries (She/Her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 month ago

      Great points. Also:

      … AI will be great at giving people exactly what they ask for …

      Honestly, I’m not even sure about this. With hallucinations and increasingly complex prompts that it fails to handle, it’s just as likely to regurgitate crap. I don’t even know if AI will get to a better state before all of this dev-firing starts to backfire and sour most company’s want to even touch AI for most development.

      Humans talk with humans and do their best to come up with solutions. AI takes prompts and looks at historical human datasets to try and determine what a human would do. It’s bound to run into something novel eventually, especially if there aren’t more datasets to pull in because human-generated development solutions become scarce.

      • Optional@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 month ago

        AI will never not-require a human to hand hold it. Because AI can never know what’s true.

        Because it doesn’t “know” anything. It only has ratios of usage maps between connected entities we call “words”.

        Sure, you can run it and hope for the best. But that will fail sooner or later.

    • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Yesterday the test team asked me for 3 new features to help them. I thought about it for a few minutes and understood that these features are all incompatible. You can get one and only one. Good luck finding an AI that understands this.

      • BombOmOm@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 month ago

        Getting the real requirements nailed down from the start is critical, not just doing the work the customer asked for. Otherwise, you get 6 months into a project and realize you must scrap 90% of the completed work; the requirements from the get-go were bad. The customer never fundamentally understood the problem and you never bothered to ask. Everyone is mad and you lost a repeat customer.

        • HubertManne@moist.catsweat.com
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          1 month ago

          yeah but with agile they should be checking the product out when its a barely working poc to determine if the basic idea is what they expect and as it advances they should be seeing each stage. Youll never get the proper requirements by second guessing what they say.

    • andrew_bidlaw@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 month ago

      Also, LLM doesn’t usually have memory or experience. It’s the first page of Google search every time you put in your tokens. A forever trainee that would never leave that stage in their career.

      Human’s abilities like pattern recognition, intuition, acummulation of proven knowledge in combination makes us become more and more effective at finding the right solution to anything.

      The LLM bubble can’t replace it and also actively hurts it as people get distanced from actual knowledge by the code door of LLM. They learn how to formulate their requests instead of learning how to do stuff they actually need. This outsourcing makes sense when you need a cookie recipe once a year, it doesn’t when you work in a bakery. What makes the doug behave each way? You don’t need to ask so you wouldn’t know.

      And the difference between asking like Lemmy and asking a chatbot is the ultimative convincing manner in which it tells you things, while forums, Q&A boards, blogs handled by people usually have some of these humane qualities behind replies and also an option for someone else to throw a bag of dicks at the suggestion of formating your system partition or turning stuff off and on.

  • cantstopthesignal@sh.itjust.works
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    1 month ago

    A reason I didn’t see listed: they are just asking for competition. Yes by all means get rid of your most talented people who know how your business is run.

    • curiousaur@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      13
      ·
      30 days ago

      And can reproduce the whole business in a weekend with the help of AI. There are no moats anymore.

  • ignirtoq@fedia.io
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    20
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I’m sorry, I mostly agree with the sentiment of the article in a feel-good kind of way, but it’s really written like how people claim bullies will get their comeuppance later in life, but then you actually look them up later and they have high paying jobs and wonderful families. There’s no substance here, just a rant.

    The author hints at analogous cases in the past of companies firing all of their engineers and then having to scramble to hire them back, but doesn’t actually get into any specifics. Be specific! Talk through those details. Prove to me the historical cases are sufficiently similar to what we’re starting to see now that justifies the claims of the rest of the article.

    • heavydust@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      I disagree. For example:

      Now, six months later, you realize that your AI-generated software is riddled with security holes. Whoops! Your database is leaking private financial data like a sieve

      We have seen this a thousand times before there was an AI. AI is like a cheap contractor out of school and companies who use it extensively will get the same results. It’s a pragmatic thing, not some phantasm about bullies. I have told so many times “I told you so” to previous managers that I trust it will happen again and again.

  • halcyonloon@midwest.social
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    7
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    I just hope people won’t go back to these abusive jobs. The oligarchy that runs the US has shown it is more than happy to lay people off to cool wages and the Fed is more than happy to blame workers getting paid a reasonable amount as the cause of inflation.

  • Phoenicianpirate@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    29 days ago

    I studied webdev and coding the hard way and I loved it. I felt unstoppable. But I still never got the job. But watching those people fail is still quite satisfying.

    • Echo Dot@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      28 days ago

      I ever so slightly miss all of the Internet Explorer 6 hacks. Sure it was utterly stupid they were required and we are in a much better position now, but it’s less fun now. Everything just uses Chromium.

      Fortunately Safari is still utter garbage so we’ve got that.

  • Krudler@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    4
    arrow-down
    18
    ·
    1 month ago

    I was a mf’ing hard core rider of the tech boom, was a sought-after consultant, and I and my colleagues rode the razor’s edge of what was possible in online gaming for 2 decades… and I can tell you now, AI presents to creative individuals who have a clue, the greatest opportunity ever handed to them. Look at how AI destroys things and “invent” solutions and you’ll pay yourself well.

    Now more than ever a “programmer” is a guy that can plug other people’s modules together and pray it works. Notice that now and git gud at what you do.

    • I Cast Fist@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      9
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 month ago

      Look at how AI destroys things and “invent” solutions and you’ll pay yourself well.

      Yeah, I’m seeing the absolute deluge of AI shovelware games. I know it generates money due to sheer volume, but to me that’s just like all those online courses of “how to dropship”. You’re being one of the worst literal definitions of “waste of resources”.

      • Krudler@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        1
        arrow-down
        6
        ·
        29 days ago

        None of you can hear. You’re all so afraid. There is OPPORTUNITY EVERYWHERE but you’re so locked into your script there’s no talking to any of you. It’s so sad to see you limit yourselves. But in a way it’s revelatory of the truth I’m speaking… the “i’m a porgammer” because ya downloaded other people’s work is over, and the path is open to those ready to work and innovate. Good luck, but you don’t need that because you’ve already decided you’ve lost.

    • TammyTobacco@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      30 days ago

      You spend all your work day in meetings bragging about yourself while never actually doing any work, aren’t you?