Comment by karlgkk

Well, an even better question might be: if everyone is the same, what does it take to be exceptional?

I'm firmly convinced that being able to troubleshoot code, even code generated by LLMs, and to write guidelines and tests to make sure it's functioning, is a skill of a shrinking pool

For smaller stuff, great. Everyone's the same. The second your application starts gaining responsibility and complexity, you're going to need to be able to demonstrate reproducibility and reliability of your application to stakeholders.

Like, your job increasingly will be creating interface checkpoints in the code, and then having the model generate each step of the pipeline. That's great, but you have understand and validate what it wrote, AND have a rich set of very comprehensive tests to be able to iterate quickly.

And as mentioned, on top of that, large swaths of the field of new people have their brains completely rotted by these tools. (certainly not all new/young people, but i've seen some real rough shit)

If anything, I see a weird gap opening up

- people who dont adopt these tools start falling out of the industry - they're too slow

- people who adopt these tools too early stop getting hired - they're too risky

- people who have experience in industry/troubleshooting/etc, who adopt these tools, become modern day cobol programmers - they're charging $700 an hour

the real question to me is this: does the amount of people taken out of the pool by being slow or risky due to these tools, outpace the reduction in jobs caused by these tools?