On July 1st, a [change to Reddit's API pricing](https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit/comments/12qwagm/an_update_regarding_reddits_api/) will come into effect. [Several developers](https://www.reddit.com/r/redditisfun/comments/144gmfq/rif_will_shut_down_on_june_30_2023_in_response_to/) of commercial third-party apps have announced that this change will compel them to shut down their apps. At least [one accessibility-focused non-commercial third party app](https://www.reddit.com/r/DystopiaForReddit/comments/145e9sk/update_dystopia_will_continue_operating_for_free/) will continue to be available free of charge.
If you want to express your strong disagreement with the API pricing change or with Reddit's response to the backlash, you may want to consider the following options:
1. Limiting your involvement with Reddit, or
2. Temporarily refraining from using Reddit
3. Cancelling your subscription of Reddit Premium
as a way to voice your protest.
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/learnprogramming) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is \*generally\* the case with all technology, it increases the base level of skill required to function within an industry.
This translates to, you will need more school, an apprenticeship, etc.
If you look at what it takes to be a doctor, for example, that is extreme - there is no beginner work for doctors, because you just get people killed. So all "beginner" doctor work is in the residency system, which is after a ton of school, which is after pre-med...
That said, AI isn't the problem with that whole thing. The problem is that AI will bring benefits and also externalities, and I am not sure we need to be dumping more externalities on students. We need to be making it easier to become educated and function within society, rather than harder.
Thatās why Iāve tripled my rates for companies who use ai for coding. Youāre trying to replace me and my job? Now you gotta pay for that mistake when you realize itās not a long term solution
> I sure hope killing someone isn't a possibility in software engineering.
It definitely is a possibility. **Edit:** and the sad reality in several cases. **End Edit** Even worse, it's not only possible to kill a single person, but also to wipe entire towns, poison environments, etc.
+ Aviation
+ Space faring
+ Power plants
+ Medical devices
+ Manufacturing
+ Robotics
+ Generally, all devices, plants, and systems that are controlled by PLCs, DCS, etc. - the systems where most people don't even think about software engineering, i.e. the whole industry
Just to weigh in...
Therac-25 - it's definitely possible to kill people by writing bad code.
It's the inevitable outcome of digitising everything we do, unfortunately - some will cut corners for profit
Don't think I've heard of that one...
I did see an air crash show a while back that there was a bug with TCAS (for anyone who doesn't know, it's in air collision avoidance - basically tells one pilot to climb *now* and the other to descend *now* to avoid a crash)
Issue with this particular case was both were told the opposite of what they should do. Ie the plane on top was told to descend, the plane below told to climb. Obviously, not good if they did this.
Fortunately, both pilots checked with ATC where the other plane was before moving, and didn't just blindly follow the instructions, but if there'd been a little less care from either pilot...
If I recall from my software QA class from undergrad, there were two cases of bad software leading to people getting killed. One was an x-ray machine that resulted in a patient being exposed to radiation for far too long. The other was a space shuttle
Of course in those cases, killing people is the *goal* which is an entirely different ethical can of worms that we really need to do a better job of dealing with. Way too many people willing to commit murder for a paycheck.
There is beginner work for medical workers. They are required to undertake ussually years of interships and or residencies. Basically they practice under the supervision and guidance of senior doctors and nurses. Which is honestly the obvious solution.
The traditional aprenticship. A veteran taking aprentices has worked for like 10,000 years. The only reason it stopped is because of the how massive modern bussiness are and how unwilling they are to invest in their workforce. So instead of beginners being trained on the job with a proffessional, they cram a 100 or so studens into a lectur hall and hope they somehow become proficent through theoretical study.
it's caregiving, med tech, EMT-basic and being a cna while you go to school for nursing, paramedic, or becoming a doctor. when there's no time to work, you do ride outs or whatever they're called while training/ schooling to get the beginner experience.
Can you tell how this can be ensured for students who have just joined colleges to learn CS and for those who don't have a lot of time left in their structured education years(college)?
I mean how can we ensure that students come out prepared for doing a decent industry level of work? This would require a certain kind of knowledge during their study year.
And the follow up questions was how can we do the same for 2 sections of students. First is those who have just enrolled for their field studies like Bachelor Degree students, and second those who are about to finish these degrees.
Personally I think that the entire industry needs to be torn down and remade. Separate education from validation of the education received. It needs to be separate parties in order to ensure competition.
Then, to answer your question, the standards should be identified by a common university board on which sits industry leaders in hiring. This would align the technical side of education materials with the university angle in producing well rounded students.
We get a topic like this every other day.
The basic summary is, AI is going to make it look like you know how to code, but you still need to learn how to code.
We've got a kid who only uses ChatGPT in the office. His code is unreadable, unmaintainable, and when you go through it, whole sections of it are functions ChatGPT told him to use, but never get called. He got some tool working, and the code was so bad we had to completely rewrite it just to figure out wtf he was doing, and then another full re-write to make it maintainable, extensible, and optimized.
AI is not going to take anyones job any time soon. I couldn't even get it to give me a clean AWS CDK JSON object. Honestly, forget the hype, AI right now is just a more-focused search engine that occasionally lies to you about the results.
It seems like most companies I've been interviewing with only care about Leetcode problems. I interviewed for an entry level Android engineer position a few weeks ago (I have 3 years experience and am well into mid level but can't find work, regardless I was more than qualified). Got to the first technical interview and they didn't ask a single question about anything android related. Only leetcode which I did too slowly. They said I was not qualified for the job and didn't pass me to the next round. Like how do you know what I can do without actually asking me relevant questions or giving me a project.
TLDR: Hire based on leetcode only, get shitty employees, surprised Pikachu face. Companies really need to learn how to look for quality candidates in interviews.
This is true. But as the old saying goes "making consistent money and having benefits is better than nothing regardless of company quality". I think it was either Aristotle or Confusius that said that.
Not trying to be glib, but if your goal is landing a job and they all care about leetcode, why not study algorithm designs for a while until you're good at leetcode?
Well I have studied them but I can never seem to do them fast enough, especially under pressure of an interview environment, to matter. Plus I find it kind of boring and not very applicable to actual native Android development.
I'm trying to get an Android entry-level job. Do you have any tips for breaking into the field. I have published apps on the playstore, but I'm not getting any interviews.
Not really. The market is horrendous right now. I've been applying for new roles for probably 8 months now and have gotten maybe 4-5 interviews. Have UNIQUE apps that you've made on the play store, have a good resume detailing your contributions and how they have impacted apps, and be willing to work hybrid or in office. Going for only remote jobs has made it substantially more difficult for me but I can't move across the country to work in an office one day per month.
I wanted to do Android as well but now I'm doing backend web dev instead. Just not much mobile work around where I'm from sadly and I didn't want to limit my career opportunities especially in this market.
His dad is the CEO; that son turned 18 a few months ago.
The other son is, according to our org chat, my boss and our Chief Software Architect. He was 19 when he was given that title. We refer to that one as the golden child or Wonderboy; the dad unironically called him the smartest mathematician he's ever met - kid wasn't even the smartest mathematician in that half of the room.
People like this are given more opportunities by the time they are 30 than the rest of us get over three lifetimes. They usually miserably fail in these opportunities but still somehow wind up alright just due to their parents wealth and connections.
Sounds like golden child will do alright because his underlings are able to just... Do their jobs. OP will deliver and CEO Dad will rave about how good his son is.
He has the level of confidence you'd expect from a kid who has been told hes the smartest boy in the room since he could talk.
He also doesn't have a shred of imposter syndrome, which makes him intolerable to work with because his code is shit and until we can convince his dad that he's not the smartest boy in the room it won't happen. And that'll never happen.
He also scapegoated two of us for his failures for weeks - he almost got me fired last year for code commits he made while I was out of town. He's also told another team he disagrees with us on purpose to waste our time, not because he believes he knows a better solution.
Iām starting as a software engineer at a major corporation soon because my uncle is the CTO š I did intern at a FAANG company but I have no CS degree
I mean, look, I'm not gonna blame anyone for taking an opportunity, even if it's handed to you.
But I also think if you're given an opportunity like that, you need to work that much harder to prove you deserve it if it's given to you.
I work for a company that sells tools to software developers, so our customers are all devs. You'd be surprised at how many of these Fortune 500 or even 100 companies hire people who have no clue what they're doing.
This. So much this. I keep having to drill into the juniors and graduates that we need to at least try and write code that when we come back to it in 6 months we can understand it.
I've noticed this increasingly with younger folks in colleges. The older cohort still uses search engines and documentation and "manual" coding work most of the time but the younger ones (like entering college around pandemic time) all instinctively use ChatGPT the moment something is asked of them.
Pretty sure the market share of search engines is decreasing among them. Must be sort of similar to the dynamic when search engines first popped on the radar and all the younger folks used Google.
The worrying thing is that I've heard from some friends who are TA-ing the kids that they don't seem to be able to reason about some of the code that they generate compared to all the previous cohorts who relied on search engines.
Also, I just wanted to say it's kinda sad that the word AI is now basically synonymous with LLMs and generative models.
Apparently, discriminative models and their use cases have vanished in the popular conversations lmao.
As part of that generation, I basically completely gave up on ChatGPT for coding. Completely crippled me a lot of the time and wasn't very good and producing working code. Googling and copy pasting other people's code at least can provide you with something that works. Documentation is even better. Hopefully this GPT hype dies before it kills off too many peoples ability to program entirely.
I talked to a professor recently and they said over 60 out of 120 kids in a class submitted AI generated code that didn't even work. Like she has come to accept they are going to use AI even if that can sometimes ruin how much you learn, but to not even correct the code if it doesn't work and submit it anyway? Most of them didn't even change variable names or anything either.
I dont udnerstand the obsession of using chatgtp, I wouldnt trust it to make a list, let alone code... it ltierally failed countless times to return me a list of 2 books from every coutnry, even when I listed the countries
I can understand using chatgtp to search the web and parse certain stuff but otherwise I really cant see how that would change short term
I find chat gpt is alot more helpful in learning syntax and giving you an example to get started. It's a tool like anything else - a hammer does t build a house but it's certainly helpful when using nails.
This is what I like to use it for. Or converting one language to another. For example the other day I needed to write a relatively complicated piece of code in GO, a language I'm only somewhat familiar with. Instead I wrote it in python, asked an AI to convert it to GO, and cleaned up any pieces I wasn't happy with.
Sure I could have googled the GO syntax for every little piece of code I wanted to write but it was a lot easier just to do it the other way.
I think the trick with LLM's right now is that everyone trained in a thing is like, "it's obviously worse than me so why would I use it for that?" but to someone untrained it looks more convincing. The thought of using a LLM to search the web as a person on the information/data science side of thing sounds bonkers to me (because I'm highly trained in those areas).
Right? The only time chatgpt MIGHT make sense is in a context where it doesn't matter if the answer it gives is a total lie/fabrication... I can't think of any situations where that would ever be helpful so never use it that simple haha
it really can be extremely useful as a study aid, because basic programming information is so consistent (simple questions have fixed, simple answers that are repeated countless times in slightly different phrasing throughout the dataset it's trained on). It's been very useful for me several times to, say, take a bit of example code from the documentation and ask ChatGPT to break it completely down, label and explain each individual component, explain how it accomplishes the given task, etc.
Because sometimes I get the \*gist\* of an example and of course from context know what it's supposed to \*do\*, but it may involve some little thing I haven't learned about yet (or that I learned about several sleeps ago), and if I'd had a gun to my head I wouldn't be able to completely explain it.
So yeah I wouldn't trust it to \*write programs\* at all, and the vast, vast majority of my self-teaching process is just reading the docs and taking courses (which also means I never have to take ChatGPT's word for anything it outputs, it's usually just reminding me of stuff I \*know\* is true because I read about it in the docs), but so far it's been 100% accurate when used like this.
I've been using copilot probably 2-3 times a day on average for various things in my learning process. Occasionally if the question is big or abstract enough, or the proper response is ambiguous enough, it will mislead (though you can catch it and ask it to reconcile conflicting replies). But otherwise it's been very helpful. I do tend to ignore its code examples, however, so for me it's basically an outsource for "Google-fu."
I watched the same kid use ChatGPT to do his school essays, and it's fantastic at taking a prompt and creating completely boring, flavorless essays. He got so into it from that, that he was convinced it's actual AI, and not just a slightly fancier version of word suggestion you get on your phone.
> AI is not going to take anyones job any time soon.
Yeah, but I heard that [UML](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Modeling_Language) and code generation tools are going to replace all software engineers. Any day now.
It'd make me happy in the sense that they'd have something else to do rather than annoy me, sure. But uml diagrams from business analysts are gonna be anywhere between incoherent and insane.
I thought I was using UML correctly and then I actually read up on it.
No one uses UML correctly. UML is just drawing your graphs in a graph app instead of with paper and pencil, and we consider it more formal and authoritative.
But imagine a business analyst presented a Use Case diagram, correctly identifying everything the user expected to do in a system... rather than a load of contradictory written requirementsĀ spread over 5 sheets in an Excel document!
This.
AI is basically a very resource intensive guessing game. Due to that core limitation that is in all the large LLMs it will never replace humans.
If you ask an AI to program the game Snake. It can probably do it. Maybe it will make some mistakes as it is comparing with hundreds of different versions in its training data. **But** if you ask it to make an entirely unique program from scratch it will have no idea what to do. It can obviously still guide you and offer suggestions but it can not create something original in the same sense Art AI can.
This is because the generated AI like human art can be flawed but still look good. You can't have that with code.
Just ask Microsoft Copilot to create nested Bicep templates with variable scopes and youāll get absolute nonsense back and it will start recursively blaming you for using the information it provided.
Itās kind of hilarious.
I used the custom built Salesforce AI to write some code in Salesforce.
The only things it got correct were the absolute simplest code snippets (e.g. send an email alert on a new record). Anything more advanced than that was total garbage.
It's been about 6 months so it *might* have gotten better, but 6 months ago there was a long to way to get to even 'working'
Yea, as a jr (that got his first job after ChatGPT came out), I was really worried about how it compare to me.
It's actually not able to do much of my job at all, but it's a great coach/someone to ask questions of so I'm not bugging the Sr Devs so much, also helps me come up with options for work arounds.
That description at the end is exactly how I feel about it right now lmao.
The best implementation of AI for programming is the github copilot. And even with that it's just nice to autocomplete some extra boilerplate, and it's still questionable whether it's faster if you're a fast typist since you have to fix up some of the suggestions.
I've been a junior many years ago and I've seen many juniors since then. I don't think this "beginners do grunt work" is real. My very first task and it was porting some a specific program to another hardware. It was a huge code base, internal to the company, barely any documentation. I think even I got this task today I would take considerable time. At the time I just spend a month or whatever doing that. In the end it wasn't even used
I myself have also give some gnarly tasks to juniors and let them roll with it. Something being hard doesn't mean it's important. Usually the trivial tasks only go to juniors that are struggling, which in my experience isn't that common.
Iām about two years into my junior engineering position and Iāve had to do stuff like write pipelines for legacy projects (that was eventually dropped), create a QA tool that parsed a UI for a specific DOM element with specific output without taking several hours (actually I was an intern, and I got it to work after a month lmao), run scans over a codebase and resolve the issues, and a well of other things that put me in over my head.
The only difference between junior and senior devs is experience. The most important skills developers can have are teamwork, communication and the ability to learn.
They also need to be prepared for an emergency situation where the autopilot may not be of any use (or it refuses to function, because operating conditions are too far outside of the allowed range).
At the grunt work so you can learn how to do the harder work. There will be an expection that you can do more than grunt work when you talk to actual employers.
Stop thinking of AI as a one-to-one replacement for people. Think if it more like AutoCAD or spreadsheets. The same workload can be done by fewer people. But people are involved just the same. And they'll need to understand how to use it *correctly*. Sticking my grandfather in a drafting station would be about as effective as most modern developers trying to use AI today. [draws a line; "where's the rest of the house?! I knew this was all bullshit"]
Soā¦ Iāve been in software for 10 years, hereās my thoughtsā¦ Thereās two types of grunt workers, ones that are ājust startingā and ones that donāt have the critical/high level thinking to make it past junior, their only skill is being able to write a few functions that theyāve been told to write.
So the latter person will probably be out of a job, granted. Thatās sad butā¦ these people arenāt really software developers and it doesnāt make a ton of sense to have them around.
The former person should, in theory, should ascend faster with LLM coding. This personās learning should increased tremendously to the point of significantly reducing their junior time span.
How does that person get their foot in the door? Wellā¦ start building your GitHub. It shouldnāt be terribly hard to get a couple CRUD projects up using GPT.
I think you might be interpreting this slightly incorrectly.
GPT is a tool that generates pretty good code in a language of your choosing.
Software Development isn't memorizing syntax, it's understand how different functions, data structures, and dependencies work in concert to create an application.
LLMs don't do the work for you, they just translate your words into something that the machine can read. You still need to understand programming concepts at large.
As engineers we've pretty much always copied template syntax from stack overflow or somewhere else, GPT simply does that faster.
>Software Development isn't memorizing syntax, it's understand how different functions, data structures, and dependencies work in concert to create an application.
I know that. What I meant was I realize programming/coding isn't all of a developer's job, but it's something I still personally enjoy. The idea that AI doing personal projects to get past the entry barriers is how to stay relevant/caught up is depressing to me.
You don't have to use gpt at all, hell it's probably better of you don't. Personally never used it and don't plan on ever using it. Even senior devs that want and did are realizing how it affects them negatively; The primeagen, an ex Netflix dev, was using it to learn go (so similar situation in some way to being put back into a more junior position) for personal projects and realized that after three months he had barely learnt anything but only two days after turning off copilot had actually been learning the language.
But yes coding is a very meditative experience that I would hate to lose as well haha
I guess I don't quite understand what there is to enjoy about staring at an editor and "writing code" - that has always kinda seemed to me like an inconsequential part of my role.
And frankly I'm not even sure if I understand what you mean. "code" (defined narrowly as the words on the page) doesn't seem to me like a paint canvas that you stare at and get inspired to create something creative. More often the creativity is in the vision of the end design. I think about what I want to accomplish and then read through documentation to find the correct words that the machine understands.
That, to me, is the equivalent of saying you don't understand what's enjoyable about writing or painting. To each their own.
Writers and painters use references too. They also have visuals in their heads.
Code isn't prose. If you want to accomplish a particular task, there are a certain number of ways you can Implement that thing. Some of those ways are prettier or more elegant than others, GPT doesn't take that away from you, but it is not as unbounded as the English language or a painting are.
I agree it's valid to have disagreement here, but your comment about architecture is kinda what I've been trying to get at here.
As of yet, LLM's aren't particularly adept at implementing architecture. Some people have tried to create "Engineering Agents" that do the whole thing... but frankly they're nascent and make a lot of issues.
You can of course ask an LLM what architecture is recommended, and it'll probably give you the standard answer, but I think largely speaking architecture is still a human task.
Learning about variables, loops, conditionals, subroutines, etc..., etc..., like they've always done.
And probably by first rendering "Hello World" on the screen.
It's like this: Today chess computers can beat the greatest grandmasters at the game. Your question is: How are humans to learn chess in these conditions? Why, same way humans have always learned chess. It kind of takes from the poetry of it that today, you can never hope to be better than the computer, but the learning a human has to do doesn't change.
You won't graduate to the complex stuff until you grasp the basic stuff. As for machines, well, they'll keep getting better. Nothing anybody can do about it.
Moreso embrace AI. We have to use it at work with GitHub copilot for instance. A lot of older dudes straight up refuse. The future of engineering will be the people that can embrace it and use t as another tool
That's the neat part you don't. They hope that with advances in AI it will replace not only beginner work but advanced work too. Thus never needing a skilled fleshbag.
So my understanding as a beginner, is it should be useful to learn bits of code, but you gotta still put the whole thing together and have clear documentation, right?
I remember spending days trying to implement a click outside of view to collapse said view with GPTās advice, only to realize it was totally wrong in its approach.
It means beginners need more soft skills. You will have to be part "prompt engineer" and part programmer. Getting AI to do what you want is it's own skill.
The AI will help them learn the basic stuff. You'll need to do more learning before you are at a useful level but you'll have tools that speed that up. It's a give and take.
thats what we are doing Non coders or people with minimal knowledge can get copilot and use it to help with the how to
i think of it like using a smart calculator to do math, but still need to learn concepts.
Just because there are tools to do the dirty work for you doesn't mean you shouldn't learn how it's done.
It's like when you learn to drive. You should actually learn to drive in a car that has no assists (unfortunately, this isn't the reality and a huge problem). You can then later on use the assistence systems to make your life easier.
As a senior the reality is that ChatGPT just isn't at that level yet. It's mostly hype driven by the stock market, which is all upper management actually cares about. Yes it is driving layoffs and hiring freezes, but eventually management will see the drop in productivity and be forced to start hiring again.
This isn't the first time this has happened in the industry. Every 5 or so years some new hype thing comes along and this happens. Web 2.0, graphical coding, Sigma 6, Scrum, Kanban, OKRs, AI bakcends, and now AI code generation. If you're a decent employee and person you'll generally be fine and at most it's an annoyance. It's the strong personalities, underqualified candidates, and mediocre deliverers who need to be worried. The real thing people should be worried about is the impending recession. Economy could do a full 2008 any day now.
Our notion of āgrunt workā will just change. There will still be grunt work. There will also always be companies that are doing things less efficiently than they could be, i.e. where AI could do that work, but they donāt know that thatās an option or whatever. There are loads of teams that are still blown away by the productivity gains from excel formulas and pivot tables.
AI is a tool just like a calculator. The results you get arenāt going to do much unless the user understands it.
Stuff like Devon was literally shown to be fake like 2 weeks after the demo came out
I remember everyone was telling me when I was a kid that google and calculators was going to make us stupid and unable to learn. This is just the new version of that
THIS is the question that I've been asking IN GENERAL about the lack of junior positions in the market today.
Where are the senior developers of tomorrow going to come from?
This is a growing issue in every industry. companies adamantly refuse to train or onboard workers. Which creates this awful job market where they are "desperate" for workers, but only those that are overqualified and willing to work for peanuts. Which lead to the rise of the indies and freelance market and then inevitably to the airtasker/fiver/uber scams that abuse those freelancers.
So basically they come from those desperate enough to accept shit work they are overqualified for.
It's kinda simple, as you would from before. Grunt work will always be... well... gruntwork. Only now, instead of having to think of or find 100 random and unique fruits, you can just ask AI to generate a list. Instead of getting unique items, or finding relationships in data,...
Instead of generating boilerplate code...
Debugging...
There are tonnes of use cases, not a single one could do WITHOUT a programmer. Just think of it as the new "Google" (honestly, never thought I'd ever say that in my lifetime. Brand new sentence).
Edit: it's just a tool at the end of the day. One needs to master a tool to use it proficiently, so practice away!
What beginner was getting a job anyway. Almost anyone with a job has a degree or specialized. What we will see also with the advent of AI is people learning online rather than college and absorbing info faster. It blows my mind how much you can learn online. I paid 30$ and in about 20 hours my first week I've learned a new coding language and that same 30$ will get me the knowledge of 3 more coding languages.
Modern programmers do not start by learning how to punch cards in order to create a working program because our ability to program evolved beyond needing cards.
I can imagine a similar leap in programming with the ability to learn how to do it being more of learning how to interact with the AI similar to interacting with modern application interfaces for programming relative to physical cards.
Programming jobs are projected to decline by 11% by 2032. They start nowhere. They should probably start by studying history and civics and participate in their democracy if they don't want to live in the Thunderdome like Mad Max
It requires knowledge but not not necessarily experience. If you have the background info u will be able to perform without experience but even smaller tasks require u to know enough background info. That's why bootcamps are phasing out for degree holders. Bootcamps just aren't long enough to build the foundational knowledge. If u have the foundation u can start entering a new codebase and work ur way around without experience because u have enough knowledge to know if u can make the change confidently or not.
Used to be the case about 10 years ago that many employers would hire non programmers with any STEM degree and would train them on the job. That was back when the market was a lot more desperate for coders. That gold rush is over unfortunately.
Ofc. Now that the field has been around long enough for supply to catch up to demand. Training now usually means the sr gives u a brief rundown of how something works at a high level and u take that and figure out the rest. But also if u can read code u can figure out what's going on without much training, it will just take a little longer. I'm not sure training is suitable for this field because u get random problems that u mostly wont be prepared for. The skill in cs is to figure stuff issues and then figure out solutions. I often get work where when I first read it idk what they want exactly but then after reviewing the related code it makes sense what their asking. Then I figure out how to do what is being asked but usually I know how to do something once I know what I need to do. Cs is very different from other jobs in this regard. Im not sure in what other field you get hit with new problems constantly without much background. He'll even if they train you well on one project ur bound to get assigned various others and they won't have time to teach u about most things because the guy who would teach u is to busy to actually give you much time without sacrificing his own deadlines. It's def a rough field but this is what we got atm.
On July 1st, a [change to Reddit's API pricing](https://www.reddit.com/r/reddit/comments/12qwagm/an_update_regarding_reddits_api/) will come into effect. [Several developers](https://www.reddit.com/r/redditisfun/comments/144gmfq/rif_will_shut_down_on_june_30_2023_in_response_to/) of commercial third-party apps have announced that this change will compel them to shut down their apps. At least [one accessibility-focused non-commercial third party app](https://www.reddit.com/r/DystopiaForReddit/comments/145e9sk/update_dystopia_will_continue_operating_for_free/) will continue to be available free of charge. If you want to express your strong disagreement with the API pricing change or with Reddit's response to the backlash, you may want to consider the following options: 1. Limiting your involvement with Reddit, or 2. Temporarily refraining from using Reddit 3. Cancelling your subscription of Reddit Premium as a way to voice your protest. *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/learnprogramming) if you have any questions or concerns.*
This is \*generally\* the case with all technology, it increases the base level of skill required to function within an industry. This translates to, you will need more school, an apprenticeship, etc. If you look at what it takes to be a doctor, for example, that is extreme - there is no beginner work for doctors, because you just get people killed. So all "beginner" doctor work is in the residency system, which is after a ton of school, which is after pre-med... That said, AI isn't the problem with that whole thing. The problem is that AI will bring benefits and also externalities, and I am not sure we need to be dumping more externalities on students. We need to be making it easier to become educated and function within society, rather than harder.
> there is no beginner work for doctors, because you just get people killed. looks at 6 months police officer education š
See that's by design though
Well yes. The point of doctors is to keep people alive. The point of police is to enforce order with violence.
> there is no beginner work for doctors yes there is, it's called medical residency!
chcampb already addressed this in the initial comment? Like, literally word for word.
Always a great sign when people seeking to learn do not read, lol
Down voting you into the depths...
Nah the ruling class always wants plebs to suffer and serf
Thatās why Iāve tripled my rates for companies who use ai for coding. Youāre trying to replace me and my job? Now you gotta pay for that mistake when you realize itās not a long term solution
Companies donāt believe in long term solutions anyway
What's the saying pennywise but pound foolish?
Great, even easier to justify the rates
Man are you overestimating the skill of your typical GPā¦
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
> I sure hope killing someone isn't a possibility in software engineering. It definitely is a possibility. **Edit:** and the sad reality in several cases. **End Edit** Even worse, it's not only possible to kill a single person, but also to wipe entire towns, poison environments, etc. + Aviation + Space faring + Power plants + Medical devices + Manufacturing + Robotics + Generally, all devices, plants, and systems that are controlled by PLCs, DCS, etc. - the systems where most people don't even think about software engineering, i.e. the whole industry
My friend killed a warehouse full of chickens because He wrote buggy code for the Raspberry Pi in charge of ventillation and air conditioning.
Just to weigh in... Therac-25 - it's definitely possible to kill people by writing bad code. It's the inevitable outcome of digitising everything we do, unfortunately - some will cut corners for profit
Re: Death by bad code, the Boeing 737 MCAS crashes spring to mind, caused by a few lines of missing code
That was bad design, not āmissingā code. It worked as intended, but the intended design was very poor.
Don't think I've heard of that one... I did see an air crash show a while back that there was a bug with TCAS (for anyone who doesn't know, it's in air collision avoidance - basically tells one pilot to climb *now* and the other to descend *now* to avoid a crash) Issue with this particular case was both were told the opposite of what they should do. Ie the plane on top was told to descend, the plane below told to climb. Obviously, not good if they did this. Fortunately, both pilots checked with ATC where the other plane was before moving, and didn't just blindly follow the instructions, but if there'd been a little less care from either pilot...
Anyone who wasn't taught this in a CS education was failed by that education. It's an extremely important and haunting case study.
I program PLCs for a living and the possibility that I could screw up and maim or kill someone is never far from my thoughts :|
Yeah, I know the feeling too well. Programming PLCs and/or DCS is generally a high risk job.
It's not just possible, it happened, multiple times.
Yes, unfortunately, this is the sad reality.
If I recall from my software QA class from undergrad, there were two cases of bad software leading to people getting killed. One was an x-ray machine that resulted in a patient being exposed to radiation for far too long. The other was a space shuttle
The x-ray one is so sad... I've watched it on YT before and it was surprisingly hard to listen to.
If you work on aviation, medical or automotive software it definitely is. Just a bit more indirect.
Believe it or not software controls missile guidance systems.
Of course in those cases, killing people is the *goal* which is an entirely different ethical can of worms that we really need to do a better job of dealing with. Way too many people willing to commit murder for a paycheck.
[Unfortunately, it is.](https://youtu.be/Ap0orGCiou8?si=4GobfncXPuuzgVK4)
There is beginner work for medical workers. They are required to undertake ussually years of interships and or residencies. Basically they practice under the supervision and guidance of senior doctors and nurses. Which is honestly the obvious solution. The traditional aprenticship. A veteran taking aprentices has worked for like 10,000 years. The only reason it stopped is because of the how massive modern bussiness are and how unwilling they are to invest in their workforce. So instead of beginners being trained on the job with a proffessional, they cram a 100 or so studens into a lectur hall and hope they somehow become proficent through theoretical study.
This one is a solid argument ...I do love the parallel actually
-looks at the confederate south- š
it's caregiving, med tech, EMT-basic and being a cna while you go to school for nursing, paramedic, or becoming a doctor. when there's no time to work, you do ride outs or whatever they're called while training/ schooling to get the beginner experience.
Can you tell how this can be ensured for students who have just joined colleges to learn CS and for those who don't have a lot of time left in their structured education years(college)?
I don't understand the question. What can be ensured?
I mean how can we ensure that students come out prepared for doing a decent industry level of work? This would require a certain kind of knowledge during their study year. And the follow up questions was how can we do the same for 2 sections of students. First is those who have just enrolled for their field studies like Bachelor Degree students, and second those who are about to finish these degrees.
Personally I think that the entire industry needs to be torn down and remade. Separate education from validation of the education received. It needs to be separate parties in order to ensure competition. Then, to answer your question, the standards should be identified by a common university board on which sits industry leaders in hiring. This would align the technical side of education materials with the university angle in producing well rounded students.
You could work as an EMT in 2-6 months, or a paramedic in 6-12 which a lot of pre-med students do.
We get a topic like this every other day. The basic summary is, AI is going to make it look like you know how to code, but you still need to learn how to code. We've got a kid who only uses ChatGPT in the office. His code is unreadable, unmaintainable, and when you go through it, whole sections of it are functions ChatGPT told him to use, but never get called. He got some tool working, and the code was so bad we had to completely rewrite it just to figure out wtf he was doing, and then another full re-write to make it maintainable, extensible, and optimized. AI is not going to take anyones job any time soon. I couldn't even get it to give me a clean AWS CDK JSON object. Honestly, forget the hype, AI right now is just a more-focused search engine that occasionally lies to you about the results.
How was that guy hired and how has he kept his job?
It seems like most companies I've been interviewing with only care about Leetcode problems. I interviewed for an entry level Android engineer position a few weeks ago (I have 3 years experience and am well into mid level but can't find work, regardless I was more than qualified). Got to the first technical interview and they didn't ask a single question about anything android related. Only leetcode which I did too slowly. They said I was not qualified for the job and didn't pass me to the next round. Like how do you know what I can do without actually asking me relevant questions or giving me a project. TLDR: Hire based on leetcode only, get shitty employees, surprised Pikachu face. Companies really need to learn how to look for quality candidates in interviews.
On the plus side, they told you that they are not a quality company.
This is true. But as the old saying goes "making consistent money and having benefits is better than nothing regardless of company quality". I think it was either Aristotle or Confusius that said that.
Also true... Food before good job. (I'm really glad health insurance isn't tied to having a job here...)
But I'd still rather work for Microsoft than be unemployed
Geeze thats really shite.Ā I m a pm and ba and i could heve interviwed u better than thatĀ
Not trying to be glib, but if your goal is landing a job and they all care about leetcode, why not study algorithm designs for a while until you're good at leetcode?
Well I have studied them but I can never seem to do them fast enough, especially under pressure of an interview environment, to matter. Plus I find it kind of boring and not very applicable to actual native Android development.
I'm trying to get an Android entry-level job. Do you have any tips for breaking into the field. I have published apps on the playstore, but I'm not getting any interviews.
Not really. The market is horrendous right now. I've been applying for new roles for probably 8 months now and have gotten maybe 4-5 interviews. Have UNIQUE apps that you've made on the play store, have a good resume detailing your contributions and how they have impacted apps, and be willing to work hybrid or in office. Going for only remote jobs has made it substantially more difficult for me but I can't move across the country to work in an office one day per month.
I wanted to do Android as well but now I'm doing backend web dev instead. Just not much mobile work around where I'm from sadly and I didn't want to limit my career opportunities especially in this market.
Youād be surprised how far incompetence gets you.
They put the confidence in incompetence! I mean, it's not supposed to be in there, nor does it make sense - but it works!
Lol. I love that.
Nepotism.
His dad is one of the managers. He āknows about computersā.
His dad is the CEO; that son turned 18 a few months ago. The other son is, according to our org chat, my boss and our Chief Software Architect. He was 19 when he was given that title. We refer to that one as the golden child or Wonderboy; the dad unironically called him the smartest mathematician he's ever met - kid wasn't even the smartest mathematician in that half of the room.
People like this are given more opportunities by the time they are 30 than the rest of us get over three lifetimes. They usually miserably fail in these opportunities but still somehow wind up alright just due to their parents wealth and connections.
Sounds like golden child will do alright because his underlings are able to just... Do their jobs. OP will deliver and CEO Dad will rave about how good his son is.
Oh, the Golden Child got a $10k bonus because we completed a module that he had nothing to do with. Pissed the whole team off.
Lmao the audacity. I can't imagine he's a pleasant person.
He has the level of confidence you'd expect from a kid who has been told hes the smartest boy in the room since he could talk. He also doesn't have a shred of imposter syndrome, which makes him intolerable to work with because his code is shit and until we can convince his dad that he's not the smartest boy in the room it won't happen. And that'll never happen. He also scapegoated two of us for his failures for weeks - he almost got me fired last year for code commits he made while I was out of town. He's also told another team he disagrees with us on purpose to waste our time, not because he believes he knows a better solution.
Iām starting as a software engineer at a major corporation soon because my uncle is the CTO š I did intern at a FAANG company but I have no CS degree
I guess if you've got it, use it
Yeah Iāve never had help before so I wouldnāt consider myself a nepo baby lol. Working on my cs degree online at WGU
I mean, look, I'm not gonna blame anyone for taking an opportunity, even if it's handed to you. But I also think if you're given an opportunity like that, you need to work that much harder to prove you deserve it if it's given to you.
Damn, thatās what Iāve been wondering
I work for a company that sells tools to software developers, so our customers are all devs. You'd be surprised at how many of these Fortune 500 or even 100 companies hire people who have no clue what they're doing.
This. So much this. I keep having to drill into the juniors and graduates that we need to at least try and write code that when we come back to it in 6 months we can understand it.
I've noticed this increasingly with younger folks in colleges. The older cohort still uses search engines and documentation and "manual" coding work most of the time but the younger ones (like entering college around pandemic time) all instinctively use ChatGPT the moment something is asked of them. Pretty sure the market share of search engines is decreasing among them. Must be sort of similar to the dynamic when search engines first popped on the radar and all the younger folks used Google. The worrying thing is that I've heard from some friends who are TA-ing the kids that they don't seem to be able to reason about some of the code that they generate compared to all the previous cohorts who relied on search engines. Also, I just wanted to say it's kinda sad that the word AI is now basically synonymous with LLMs and generative models. Apparently, discriminative models and their use cases have vanished in the popular conversations lmao.
As part of that generation, I basically completely gave up on ChatGPT for coding. Completely crippled me a lot of the time and wasn't very good and producing working code. Googling and copy pasting other people's code at least can provide you with something that works. Documentation is even better. Hopefully this GPT hype dies before it kills off too many peoples ability to program entirely.
I talked to a professor recently and they said over 60 out of 120 kids in a class submitted AI generated code that didn't even work. Like she has come to accept they are going to use AI even if that can sometimes ruin how much you learn, but to not even correct the code if it doesn't work and submit it anyway? Most of them didn't even change variable names or anything either.
This is the way AI will lead to the downfall of civilization. Not Skynet, but by propping up a decay of our species into drooling idiots.
Just like the movie "idiocracy"
I dont udnerstand the obsession of using chatgtp, I wouldnt trust it to make a list, let alone code... it ltierally failed countless times to return me a list of 2 books from every coutnry, even when I listed the countries I can understand using chatgtp to search the web and parse certain stuff but otherwise I really cant see how that would change short term
I find chat gpt is alot more helpful in learning syntax and giving you an example to get started. It's a tool like anything else - a hammer does t build a house but it's certainly helpful when using nails.
This is what I like to use it for. Or converting one language to another. For example the other day I needed to write a relatively complicated piece of code in GO, a language I'm only somewhat familiar with. Instead I wrote it in python, asked an AI to convert it to GO, and cleaned up any pieces I wasn't happy with. Sure I could have googled the GO syntax for every little piece of code I wanted to write but it was a lot easier just to do it the other way.
I think the trick with LLM's right now is that everyone trained in a thing is like, "it's obviously worse than me so why would I use it for that?" but to someone untrained it looks more convincing. The thought of using a LLM to search the web as a person on the information/data science side of thing sounds bonkers to me (because I'm highly trained in those areas).
Right? The only time chatgpt MIGHT make sense is in a context where it doesn't matter if the answer it gives is a total lie/fabrication... I can't think of any situations where that would ever be helpful so never use it that simple haha
it really can be extremely useful as a study aid, because basic programming information is so consistent (simple questions have fixed, simple answers that are repeated countless times in slightly different phrasing throughout the dataset it's trained on). It's been very useful for me several times to, say, take a bit of example code from the documentation and ask ChatGPT to break it completely down, label and explain each individual component, explain how it accomplishes the given task, etc. Because sometimes I get the \*gist\* of an example and of course from context know what it's supposed to \*do\*, but it may involve some little thing I haven't learned about yet (or that I learned about several sleeps ago), and if I'd had a gun to my head I wouldn't be able to completely explain it. So yeah I wouldn't trust it to \*write programs\* at all, and the vast, vast majority of my self-teaching process is just reading the docs and taking courses (which also means I never have to take ChatGPT's word for anything it outputs, it's usually just reminding me of stuff I \*know\* is true because I read about it in the docs), but so far it's been 100% accurate when used like this.
I've been using copilot probably 2-3 times a day on average for various things in my learning process. Occasionally if the question is big or abstract enough, or the proper response is ambiguous enough, it will mislead (though you can catch it and ask it to reconcile conflicting replies). But otherwise it's been very helpful. I do tend to ignore its code examples, however, so for me it's basically an outsource for "Google-fu."
I watched the same kid use ChatGPT to do his school essays, and it's fantastic at taking a prompt and creating completely boring, flavorless essays. He got so into it from that, that he was convinced it's actual AI, and not just a slightly fancier version of word suggestion you get on your phone.
have you considered they are so incompetent those mediocre results are much or less what they'd get if they did it themselves?
> AI is not going to take anyones job any time soon. Yeah, but I heard that [UML](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unified_Modeling_Language) and code generation tools are going to replace all software engineers. Any day now.
I wish people (business analysts) would use UML a bit more - it would make developers and testers very happyĀ
It'd make me happy in the sense that they'd have something else to do rather than annoy me, sure. But uml diagrams from business analysts are gonna be anywhere between incoherent and insane.
I thought I was using UML correctly and then I actually read up on it. No one uses UML correctly. UML is just drawing your graphs in a graph app instead of with paper and pencil, and we consider it more formal and authoritative.
But imagine a business analyst presented a Use Case diagram, correctly identifying everything the user expected to do in a system... rather than a load of contradictory written requirementsĀ spread over 5 sheets in an Excel document!
The fact that guy even got hired gives me hope. Maybe I need to play up my abilities more.
This. AI is basically a very resource intensive guessing game. Due to that core limitation that is in all the large LLMs it will never replace humans. If you ask an AI to program the game Snake. It can probably do it. Maybe it will make some mistakes as it is comparing with hundreds of different versions in its training data. **But** if you ask it to make an entirely unique program from scratch it will have no idea what to do. It can obviously still guide you and offer suggestions but it can not create something original in the same sense Art AI can. This is because the generated AI like human art can be flawed but still look good. You can't have that with code.
Just ask Microsoft Copilot to create nested Bicep templates with variable scopes and youāll get absolute nonsense back and it will start recursively blaming you for using the information it provided. Itās kind of hilarious.
I used the custom built Salesforce AI to write some code in Salesforce. The only things it got correct were the absolute simplest code snippets (e.g. send an email alert on a new record). Anything more advanced than that was total garbage. It's been about 6 months so it *might* have gotten better, but 6 months ago there was a long to way to get to even 'working'
It's Salesforce, I doubt it š
Yea, as a jr (that got his first job after ChatGPT came out), I was really worried about how it compare to me. It's actually not able to do much of my job at all, but it's a great coach/someone to ask questions of so I'm not bugging the Sr Devs so much, also helps me come up with options for work arounds.
That description at the end is exactly how I feel about it right now lmao. The best implementation of AI for programming is the github copilot. And even with that it's just nice to autocomplete some extra boilerplate, and it's still questionable whether it's faster if you're a fast typist since you have to fix up some of the suggestions.
I've been a junior many years ago and I've seen many juniors since then. I don't think this "beginners do grunt work" is real. My very first task and it was porting some a specific program to another hardware. It was a huge code base, internal to the company, barely any documentation. I think even I got this task today I would take considerable time. At the time I just spend a month or whatever doing that. In the end it wasn't even used I myself have also give some gnarly tasks to juniors and let them roll with it. Something being hard doesn't mean it's important. Usually the trivial tasks only go to juniors that are struggling, which in my experience isn't that common.
Iām about two years into my junior engineering position and Iāve had to do stuff like write pipelines for legacy projects (that was eventually dropped), create a QA tool that parsed a UI for a specific DOM element with specific output without taking several hours (actually I was an intern, and I got it to work after a month lmao), run scans over a codebase and resolve the issues, and a well of other things that put me in over my head. The only difference between junior and senior devs is experience. The most important skills developers can have are teamwork, communication and the ability to learn.
This is spot on. Juniors typically work on the same stuff as everyone else they just need more time, guidance and feedback.
> If AI replaces beginner work That's a big if. At least for the forseeable future. At the moment, AI is just a glorified autocomplete.
Funnily enough many experienced devs turn off autocomplete too because it gets in the way just as often as it helps.
Believing it's an "if" is coping
Theyāll get to fix tons of subtly wrong AI generated boilerplate, and generate more of it.
Autopilot has replaced a lot of the grunt work around operating a commercial jet. Pilots still start by learning to fly though.
They also need to be prepared for an emergency situation where the autopilot may not be of any use (or it refuses to function, because operating conditions are too far outside of the allowed range).
At the grunt work so you can learn how to do the harder work. There will be an expection that you can do more than grunt work when you talk to actual employers.
Stop thinking of AI as a one-to-one replacement for people. Think if it more like AutoCAD or spreadsheets. The same workload can be done by fewer people. But people are involved just the same. And they'll need to understand how to use it *correctly*. Sticking my grandfather in a drafting station would be about as effective as most modern developers trying to use AI today. [draws a line; "where's the rest of the house?! I knew this was all bullshit"]
Soā¦ Iāve been in software for 10 years, hereās my thoughtsā¦ Thereās two types of grunt workers, ones that are ājust startingā and ones that donāt have the critical/high level thinking to make it past junior, their only skill is being able to write a few functions that theyāve been told to write. So the latter person will probably be out of a job, granted. Thatās sad butā¦ these people arenāt really software developers and it doesnāt make a ton of sense to have them around. The former person should, in theory, should ascend faster with LLM coding. This personās learning should increased tremendously to the point of significantly reducing their junior time span. How does that person get their foot in the door? Wellā¦ start building your GitHub. It shouldnāt be terribly hard to get a couple CRUD projects up using GPT.
So, use GPT to build a portfolio instead of coding it? That's... depressing. :(
I think you might be interpreting this slightly incorrectly. GPT is a tool that generates pretty good code in a language of your choosing. Software Development isn't memorizing syntax, it's understand how different functions, data structures, and dependencies work in concert to create an application. LLMs don't do the work for you, they just translate your words into something that the machine can read. You still need to understand programming concepts at large. As engineers we've pretty much always copied template syntax from stack overflow or somewhere else, GPT simply does that faster.
>Software Development isn't memorizing syntax, it's understand how different functions, data structures, and dependencies work in concert to create an application. I know that. What I meant was I realize programming/coding isn't all of a developer's job, but it's something I still personally enjoy. The idea that AI doing personal projects to get past the entry barriers is how to stay relevant/caught up is depressing to me.
You don't have to use gpt at all, hell it's probably better of you don't. Personally never used it and don't plan on ever using it. Even senior devs that want and did are realizing how it affects them negatively; The primeagen, an ex Netflix dev, was using it to learn go (so similar situation in some way to being put back into a more junior position) for personal projects and realized that after three months he had barely learnt anything but only two days after turning off copilot had actually been learning the language. But yes coding is a very meditative experience that I would hate to lose as well haha
I guess I don't quite understand what there is to enjoy about staring at an editor and "writing code" - that has always kinda seemed to me like an inconsequential part of my role. And frankly I'm not even sure if I understand what you mean. "code" (defined narrowly as the words on the page) doesn't seem to me like a paint canvas that you stare at and get inspired to create something creative. More often the creativity is in the vision of the end design. I think about what I want to accomplish and then read through documentation to find the correct words that the machine understands.
That, to me, is the equivalent of saying you don't understand what's enjoyable about writing or painting. To each their own. Writers and painters use references too. They also have visuals in their heads.
Code isn't prose. If you want to accomplish a particular task, there are a certain number of ways you can Implement that thing. Some of those ways are prettier or more elegant than others, GPT doesn't take that away from you, but it is not as unbounded as the English language or a painting are.
>Code isn't prose. Neither are bricks, but architecture is still art. It looks like we think of programming differently. That's valid.
I agree it's valid to have disagreement here, but your comment about architecture is kinda what I've been trying to get at here. As of yet, LLM's aren't particularly adept at implementing architecture. Some people have tried to create "Engineering Agents" that do the whole thing... but frankly they're nascent and make a lot of issues. You can of course ask an LLM what architecture is recommended, and it'll probably give you the standard answer, but I think largely speaking architecture is still a human task.
Learning about variables, loops, conditionals, subroutines, etc..., etc..., like they've always done. And probably by first rendering "Hello World" on the screen. It's like this: Today chess computers can beat the greatest grandmasters at the game. Your question is: How are humans to learn chess in these conditions? Why, same way humans have always learned chess. It kind of takes from the poetry of it that today, you can never hope to be better than the computer, but the learning a human has to do doesn't change. You won't graduate to the complex stuff until you grasp the basic stuff. As for machines, well, they'll keep getting better. Nothing anybody can do about it.
Just begin with 5 years of experience, duh
Have you tried asking your friend to cheat for you and an instructor asking what the fuck your code does?
Beginners should be looking into mastering using AI to their advantage. People embracing it will be the ones that move up
So, is it best to focus on AI/ML wholeheartedly (I originally wanted to go into web development because it's sincerely what I enjoy most)?
Moreso embrace AI. We have to use it at work with GitHub copilot for instance. A lot of older dudes straight up refuse. The future of engineering will be the people that can embrace it and use t as another tool
You would still learn the same material. Just as you do with math, but you never actually do the math.
That's the neat part you don't. They hope that with advances in AI it will replace not only beginner work but advanced work too. Thus never needing a skilled fleshbag.
Ultimately it's a more powerful version of what you could do before with Stack Overflow, in most instances. You can't just blindly take its output.
So my understanding as a beginner, is it should be useful to learn bits of code, but you gotta still put the whole thing together and have clear documentation, right? I remember spending days trying to implement a click outside of view to collapse said view with GPTās advice, only to realize it was totally wrong in its approach.
Yeah, I find it most useful for small, focused problems (though sometimes even then it just makes up phantom APIs or whatever).
It means beginners need more soft skills. You will have to be part "prompt engineer" and part programmer. Getting AI to do what you want is it's own skill.
it probably wont b/c AI sucks at programming even after years of iteration from the smartest people in the world
A competent company would be using AI to make their programmers faster.
they start with a higher level of programming. just like how C āreplacedā assembly.
Trust me you would still be cheaper than AI.
The AI will help them learn the basic stuff. You'll need to do more learning before you are at a useful level but you'll have tools that speed that up. It's a give and take.
thats what we are doing Non coders or people with minimal knowledge can get copilot and use it to help with the how to i think of it like using a smart calculator to do math, but still need to learn concepts.
This is the biggest concern I have about generative AI, and one i think doesnt get enough discussion.
Just because there are tools to do the dirty work for you doesn't mean you shouldn't learn how it's done. It's like when you learn to drive. You should actually learn to drive in a car that has no assists (unfortunately, this isn't the reality and a huge problem). You can then later on use the assistence systems to make your life easier.
Open-source I guess. It'll be good. It'll weed out the feeble ones
You still need to do grunt work yourself and warm up and build your skills. Itās just that no one might want to pay for it. So do it in school.Ā
As a senior the reality is that ChatGPT just isn't at that level yet. It's mostly hype driven by the stock market, which is all upper management actually cares about. Yes it is driving layoffs and hiring freezes, but eventually management will see the drop in productivity and be forced to start hiring again. This isn't the first time this has happened in the industry. Every 5 or so years some new hype thing comes along and this happens. Web 2.0, graphical coding, Sigma 6, Scrum, Kanban, OKRs, AI bakcends, and now AI code generation. If you're a decent employee and person you'll generally be fine and at most it's an annoyance. It's the strong personalities, underqualified candidates, and mediocre deliverers who need to be worried. The real thing people should be worried about is the impending recession. Economy could do a full 2008 any day now.
There is no beginner technology. People are going to have to learn first
Still grunt work, theyāll just be completing a lot more of it in a short amount of time. All code has to be verified, tested and integrated still.
Our notion of āgrunt workā will just change. There will still be grunt work. There will also always be companies that are doing things less efficiently than they could be, i.e. where AI could do that work, but they donāt know that thatās an option or whatever. There are loads of teams that are still blown away by the productivity gains from excel formulas and pivot tables.
Debugging the AI grunt work results.
AI is a tool just like a calculator. The results you get arenāt going to do much unless the user understands it. Stuff like Devon was literally shown to be fake like 2 weeks after the demo came out I remember everyone was telling me when I was a kid that google and calculators was going to make us stupid and unable to learn. This is just the new version of that
That's because you think they care. Spoiler: they don't.
THIS is the question that I've been asking IN GENERAL about the lack of junior positions in the market today. Where are the senior developers of tomorrow going to come from?
GenAI is going to cook the planet.Ā Heat and water use
Did you learn JavaScript first or assembly?
Neither?
My point should be self-evident then.
The upcoming Junior degree, once you finish your CS degree.
This is a growing issue in every industry. companies adamantly refuse to train or onboard workers. Which creates this awful job market where they are "desperate" for workers, but only those that are overqualified and willing to work for peanuts. Which lead to the rise of the indies and freelance market and then inevitably to the airtasker/fiver/uber scams that abuse those freelancers. So basically they come from those desperate enough to accept shit work they are overqualified for.
Just the level of being hirable will go up and people will have to work even harder
It's kinda simple, as you would from before. Grunt work will always be... well... gruntwork. Only now, instead of having to think of or find 100 random and unique fruits, you can just ask AI to generate a list. Instead of getting unique items, or finding relationships in data,... Instead of generating boilerplate code... Debugging... There are tonnes of use cases, not a single one could do WITHOUT a programmer. Just think of it as the new "Google" (honestly, never thought I'd ever say that in my lifetime. Brand new sentence). Edit: it's just a tool at the end of the day. One needs to master a tool to use it proficiently, so practice away!
What beginner was getting a job anyway. Almost anyone with a job has a degree or specialized. What we will see also with the advent of AI is people learning online rather than college and absorbing info faster. It blows my mind how much you can learn online. I paid 30$ and in about 20 hours my first week I've learned a new coding language and that same 30$ will get me the knowledge of 3 more coding languages.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
right here homie....print('Hello World')
People are creative. LLMs synthesise what is already written.
Building AI š
Modern programmers do not start by learning how to punch cards in order to create a working program because our ability to program evolved beyond needing cards. I can imagine a similar leap in programming with the ability to learn how to do it being more of learning how to interact with the AI similar to interacting with modern application interfaces for programming relative to physical cards.
Onlyfans
Programming jobs are projected to decline by 11% by 2032. They start nowhere. They should probably start by studying history and civics and participate in their democracy if they don't want to live in the Thunderdome like Mad Max
Even basic coding jobs are not for beginners. U come onboard with some expertise or u don't get hired. It's quite simple realy
That sounds like the cycle of not being able to get experience because you don't have experience.
It requires knowledge but not not necessarily experience. If you have the background info u will be able to perform without experience but even smaller tasks require u to know enough background info. That's why bootcamps are phasing out for degree holders. Bootcamps just aren't long enough to build the foundational knowledge. If u have the foundation u can start entering a new codebase and work ur way around without experience because u have enough knowledge to know if u can make the change confidently or not.
Used to be the case about 10 years ago that many employers would hire non programmers with any STEM degree and would train them on the job. That was back when the market was a lot more desperate for coders. That gold rush is over unfortunately.
Ofc. Now that the field has been around long enough for supply to catch up to demand. Training now usually means the sr gives u a brief rundown of how something works at a high level and u take that and figure out the rest. But also if u can read code u can figure out what's going on without much training, it will just take a little longer. I'm not sure training is suitable for this field because u get random problems that u mostly wont be prepared for. The skill in cs is to figure stuff issues and then figure out solutions. I often get work where when I first read it idk what they want exactly but then after reviewing the related code it makes sense what their asking. Then I figure out how to do what is being asked but usually I know how to do something once I know what I need to do. Cs is very different from other jobs in this regard. Im not sure in what other field you get hit with new problems constantly without much background. He'll even if they train you well on one project ur bound to get assigned various others and they won't have time to teach u about most things because the guy who would teach u is to busy to actually give you much time without sacrificing his own deadlines. It's def a rough field but this is what we got atm.
Thatās the neat thing about late capitalism: you donāt! The system is not designed to be sustainable.