I have been reading a lot that 90% of their code is AI generated, companies are pushing developers to use AI as it makes them fast. But I am a little cautious of believing them. Is it true? Also sorry I didn’t find a css career subreddit so I am asking here.
My company gave us access to AI tools and encourage us to use them, but nothing is forced, which is nice. I like using Claude for light scripting, explaining bits of code, and as a second set of eyes during review.
If you have AI generate all of your code, you’re going to have a bad time. But if you’re completely against AI and unwilling to use it, you’re probably going to be left in the dust.
This is the only sane answer here, and it makes sense because of the sentiment on Lemmy.
There is one constant rule about software engineering. You must be adaptable. The career is ever changing, you need to be okay with that. I think a lot of people right now are finding out that if they dig in their heels they think they’re making a point, but the company doesn’t care, there’s the door. AI is just another change in the career. Adapt, or be left behind.
The job isn’t the same as it was 5 years ago, which also was different than it was 10 years before that, and then 10 years before that. I’ll say this is a large change, but that’s the job.
I think the biggest thing is there’s no room for “I’m a react engineer” anymore. Everyone needs to be everything, and it means learn as much as you can as fast as you can. You must be a “T-shaped” engineer. Wide breadth, with specific deep knowledge that makes you stand out. You can be an expert at react, but should also know how to code in the backend, and how to deploy, how to work with APIs, some basic cloud architecture. If you’re not learning, you’re falling behind.
1940: “These mechanical monstrosities lack the intuitive check of a human mind. A mathematician can spot a stray digit through reason; a machine will blindly process an error to its conclusion. We are trading the elegance of thought for a noisy, fallible crate of glass and wire.”
1950: “Direct control is the only honest way to command a machine. If you cannot visualize the specific vacuum tube you are firing, you aren’t truly programming. To delegate this to any intermediary is to invite a loss of precision that the hardware simply cannot afford.”
1955: “These ‘mnemonics’ are a crutch for the lazy. By using words instead of addresses, the programmer loses the vital ‘feel’ for memory layout. We are seeing a five-fold decrease in efficiency; no automated assembler can ever match the tight, hand-calculated loops of a master of bits.”
1965: “Compilers are the death of performance. These languages allow ‘programmers’ who don’t even understand the CPU architecture to bloat memory with generic subroutines. Software is becoming a black box—impenetrable, unoptimized, and dangerously detached from the reality of the silicon.”
It’s what makes being a developer a double edged sword. I’m always learning new skills, architectures, languages, and technologies all of the time, which is great. Management wanting me to know it last year to complete today’s new work yesterday is not so great. You have to stay on your toes and learn (and understand) new tech or someone else will.
Agree, and I think it’s funny someone downvoted you because that’s always been the case, AI didn’t change that. It’s just now we’re seeing the next evolution and we’ll see who sticks around and who doesn’t.
Evolve or die. Some people don’t like to hear that I guess. It is what it is.
Or AI usage might become too expensive as energy costs rise, datacenter equipment becomes more expensive, monopolies emerge, investor funding dries up.
Putting all ethical concerns aside, the bad code written by ClaudeGPT could also finally cause a software quality decrease and explode in the faces of the companies using them, making any velocity gains dubious. Services may also start enshittifying.
There’s also the legal aspect which is not fully settled. The dependence on US companies which might not remain OK forever in the rest of the world.
It is to be noted that, while programmers and executives are claiming they see gains, the science is not settled. Studies so far seem to indicate the contrary is observed in practice, although it remains to be seen if it stays that way in the future because, apparently, results got way better with Claude Whatever 4.6.
I’m not predicting a collapse, just saying these are plausible scenarios. And if any of them comes true, even if there’s no collapse, there will be a spot for actual software engineers that refused to use it all along and remained sharp, and they won’t be “left in the dust”.
It sure is a bad time to get into webdev though as a LLM-skeptic. You really have to choose your jobs to avoid writing code millions of developers wrote before, because there’s a good chance you’re working on something nobody needs and/or that slop machines can do it faster than you.
Just like human code generation, you need to review what’s being generated.
AI can speed up the writing of code but humans need to review it. Even if it’s always right humans doing a review will help generate new useful ideas for future improvements. Having AI do everything isn’t good, but using it to augment the process is incredible.
Ah the centrist approach. 🙄
It’s valid stance. I use it in a similar way as do many devs.
Claude is built into VS and is good for spot checks and review. I will go days without using it, but it’s a more context aware stack overflow. I have no expectations to use any AI tools and our CISO said the other day that he’s hard blocking Claude code.
I would be happy if all AI disappeared, but I’ll lightly use the tools to support my work since they’re there. I don’t use it for code generation but will sometimes accept auto complete comments.
Its always fascinating that most devs aren’t more frustrated about the wholesale theft of their jobs and things code produced.
Doubly so when it’s all done with the intention of making you obsolete
I’m frustrated with the fact that AI is replacing a lot of junior positions, and with people that use it to fully automate tasks. It does not bode well for the future of the industry.
I’m not a junior dev though, and I use AI as a tool, which is what it is, to plan changes, search for potential issues while I check something else, then review their output and so on. The premise is that I do understand our code very well, and that I know exactly what must be done when proposing changes. It helps me autocomplete while I write, check hard to find docs or write/format doc pages. I always search for actual real sources before committing anything.
It’s a tool, it would be crazy to keep using a hatchet because chainsaws sometimes injure people. With proper training and knowledge a chainsaw helps you work faster.
Now, there was no LLM when I was a junior Dev so I acknowledge that my position is a bit of “f u I got mine”, but we can’t deny that it’s a very useful tool that helps in coding
Still completely against and very frustrated with the full automation and erasure of junior positions though. It won’t affect me that much personally, but the industry will hurt, individuals will suffer and that’s horrible.
You’re right. That is a very “fuck you got mine” position to take.
I will say I have 3 friends, all senior devs. 2 got laid off this month. It doesn’t affect you until it does.
I’m not taking that position, I’m taking the position of acknowledging how badly it is being used while also taking point on how useful for Devs it is. I was acknowledging the position I am in due to my life in coding work, to give proper context.
You are in an Australian server, I didn’t know that the American AI Dev erasure craze had expanded there, it definitely is affective the Spanish junior positions, but in my data engineering sector, senior positions are permanently lacking.
In any case, I’m sorry for your friends, but I’d be surprised if they don’t find another job fast. Job offers in my country for senior positions have not been reduced, and given that junior positions are being reduced and seniors eventually retire, I don’t see enough reduction to fill the vacuum that the lack of junior is going to create in senior fields.
Mind you, I’m not saying this to say I don’t care, it’s actually the opposite. I’m saying this to say that I care even though I don’t think it will affect me personally in a risk my paycheck kinda way.
Linters have existed for a long time. They were the original AI that generated code. Using AI to supplement work in a similar manner isn’t replacing devs. Being able to search for answers like one would Google only not needing to leave your IDE and having it be semi context aware is not what’s replacing devs. Trash like Claude code and people that are generating entire dogshit apps is what’s replacing devs. I’m not defending the latter, just explaining the “centrist” approach to using AI.
In general, I hate AI. I wish it would all go away, but it’s not going to. If every other dev is using AI in their workflow and you aren’t, you’re falling behind in production, which in the business world is the only thing that matters, or you’re a great dev and don’t make mistakes where searching Claude for answers is faster than searching the web.
If you don’t like AI tools, then don’t use them. While it’s there and a sunk cost, I’m going to use it for help when I need it. I can still be critical of it but understand it’s here to stay, so I adapt.
So I’vw never used a linter that generates code. I’ve used them to enforce code styles but never to generate code. And code generation isn’t really the point there.
Second. AI isn’t replacing devs? The massive layoffs in the tech sector would disagree. Its also not “dogshit apps”. Google claims 90% of their code is generated and Microsoft claims 30% both come coupled with massive layoffs. To be fair Microsoft is kinda dogshit and Google search sucks now. But googles apps remain higher quality.
If the centrist argument is just to shrug and say “I guess we’re stuck with it”. I guess I’d say you aren’t a centrist and are a tacit supporter of ai.
I didn’t say AI isn’t replacing devs. I specifically mentioned stuff like Claude code and people that generate complete apps from AI. That work is dog shit. Using it as a glorified search engine is not the same thing. You’re strawmaning this argument by selectively picking words without context from my response. Debate in good faith or don’t respond.
Its not like you can have one without the other. But I’ve found that people demanding responses in “good faith” are rarely engaged in it themselves.
The comment you reaponsed to asked why you aren’t more angry about it. And you responded in support, without any reason why you wouldn’t be mad, and also that it was only taking “bad” jobs.
But I specifically mentioned work at microsoft and Google which aren’t “dog shit”.
You never asked why I’m not more angry. You stated that you don’t understand why people aren’t more angry. I also didn’t say that it’s taking bad jobs, I’m saying people that use it to generate full and or complex apps are creating dog shit work. The product is what’s bad.
But even had I said they were bad jobs, I’d argue that both MS and Google are consistently releasing new and worse software specifically thanks to AI making them dog shit. I’d sooner work for Google than MS, but only by a cunt hair.
To address more my anger at AI… The part I hate most is the environmental impact. The water consumption, the power consumption and all of the fallout that comes with that. I hate that it has skyrocketed the cost of computer parts. I hate the people at the top running this whole thing. I also hate that companies are so short sighted that they are trying to replace devs with AI.
I can only get angry at so many things and these days there’s a lot to choose from. Yes I’m angry that it’s taking jobs, but of everything AI, that’s like my 5th concern. I can’t stop the tech from being developed and even if every professional dev tried to protest by not using it, it would still be coming because companies are stupid and going to keep throwing money at it. Like is said, my usage of it is extremely light and nothing I do is dependent on it.
I agree with “all”, but the percentage AI can do usefully is increasing quickly and depends a lot on your having written down and documented everything the super-smart-sometimes-hallucinating new employee needs to know.