←back to thread

440 points pseudolus | 2 comments | | HN request time: 0.416s | source
Show context
muldvarp ◴[] No.45052736[source]
Brutal that software engineering went from one of the least automatable jobs to a job that is universally agreed to be "most exposed to automation".

Was good while it lasted though.

replies(15): >>45052803 #>>45052830 #>>45052911 #>>45052938 #>>45053022 #>>45053037 #>>45056787 #>>45056886 #>>45057129 #>>45057182 #>>45057448 #>>45057657 #>>45057837 #>>45058585 #>>45063626 #
elif ◴[] No.45056787[source]
I'm not sure it's that our job is the most automatable, but that the interface is the easiest to adapt to our workflow.

I have a feeling language models will be good at virtually every "sit at a desk" job in a virtually identical capacity, it's just the act of plugging an AI into these roles is non-obvious.

Like every business was impacted by the Internet equally, the early applications were just an artifact of what was an easy business decision.. e.g. it was easier to start a dotcom than to migrate a traditional corporate process.

What we will see here with AI is not the immediate replacement of jobs, but the disruption of markets with offerings that human labor simply can't out-compete.

replies(4): >>45057205 #>>45057665 #>>45059706 #>>45059819 #
throwaway31131 ◴[] No.45057205[source]
> I'm not sure it's that our job is the most automatable

I don't know. It seems pretty friendly to automation to me.

When was the last time you wrote assembly? When was the last time you had map memory? Think about blitting memory to a screen buffer to draw a square on a screen? Schedule processes and threads?

These are things that I routinely did as a junior engineer writing software a long time ago. Most people at that time did. For the most part, the computer does them all now. People still do them, but only when it really counts and applications are niche.

Think about how large code bases are now and how complicated software systems are. How many layers they have. Complexity on this scale was unthinkable not so long ago.

It's all possible because the computer manages much of the complexity through various forms of automation.

Expect more automation. Maybe LLMs are the vehicle that delivers it, maybe not. But more automation in software is the rule, not the exception.

replies(4): >>45057357 #>>45057563 #>>45057764 #>>45057994 #
1. hex4def6 ◴[] No.45057357[source]
This has been my argument as well. We've been climbing the abstraction ladder for years. Assembly -> C -> OOP ->... this just seems like another layer of abstraction. "Programmers" are going to become "architects".

The labor cost of implementing a given feature is going to dramatically drop. Jevons Paradox paradox will hopefully still mean that the labor pool will just be used to create '10x' the output (or whatever the number actually is).

If the cost of a line of code / feature / app becomes basically '0', will we still hit a limit in terms of how much software can be consumed? Or do consumers have an infinite hunger for new software? It feels like the answer has to be 'it's finite'. We have a limited attention span of (say) 8hrs/person * 8 billion.

replies(1): >>45058519 #
2. QuadmasterXLII ◴[] No.45058519[source]
the cost of creating a line of code dropped to zero. the ongoing cost of having created a line of code has if anything gone up.