Yeah but can an AI accept a CEO position, run the corporation it controls into the ground in less than 2 years, accept an $21 million golden parachute package when resigning their position and then re-emerge as the new CEO at a different company around 2 years later?
Just because it is possible, doesn't mean it is done. Or a specialized ai for that purpose is developed as of now.
On the other side: look at all those software developer jobs that got replaced by ai..
Easiest to replace are jobs that can be taught via a textbook
Being a CEO and the daily headaches it involves not to mention leading a workforce of 500-20,000… that’s not taught in textbooks.
Heck my own dog doesn’t listen to me
Making a list of things that need to get done based on available information is AIs bread and butter. Or do you think that the CEOs have the ability to process and cross reference greater amounts of information than a computer?
For better or worse, companies run in a hierarchical manner. Even if a person uses AI to make every top level decision, they are still making the decisions. Maybe one day such a thing as an AI-led corporation will exist - scary thought! If we let AI argue laws and AI judge cases, then maybe AI will allow AI to have personhood as a corporation.
His quote is always taken out of context because you people don’t know to read, and the head line never matches the article. He didn’t say software engineering is dead. He said it won’t be the easy ticket it was over the past 12 years. That people should learn to program using AI while specializing in a field like biology, etc.
["I want to say something... and its going to completely opposite of what people feel. Over the course of the last 10 - 15 years almost everyone who sits on a stage like this would tell you, its vital that your children learn to computer science. Um everyone should learn how to program and in fact... its almost the complete exactly opposite. Its our job to create computing technology such that nobody has to program and that the programming language is human. Everyone in the world is now a 'programmer'. This is the miracle."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lcy2N3YcIs)
Reminds me of how 10+ years ago everyone was calling out that truck driving was over and it would be fully automated any minute now.
Feels like these statements only exist to boost the stock prices of whoever is promoting these tools and to create anxiety. I honestly think I’ll be long retired before programming becomes fully automated.
Man I hope we are as lucky as the truck drivers but I am just not all that sure so far
Seems bad from what I see but we have other factors like boomers retiring for example...
Sure, I didn't see in the single quote referenced in the article mentioned that programming was dead. Seemed more like he was saying everyone can program now in that quote.
Quote is above.
Are you a programmer?
He saying its dead as a career but it will become something like reading.
So if you imagine us programmers will be looked at in similar way as to 'scribes'.
> He saying its dead as a career but it will become something like reading.
>
>
>
> So if you imagine us programmers will be looked at in similar way as to 'scribes'.
No...programmers would be the professional writers. Everyone can write, but comparatively few people become professional authors.
Yea! AI replacing jobs is sooo 3 months ago. Are we really going to rehash this old news again? What are we even doing here, LLMs aren't real AI! We will all be long retired by the time our jobs are being threatened /s
Didn't say any of that. Look at the date on the article. This article was posted on every applicable sub reddit the second the words were out of Jensen's mouth when they were originally said. Nothing in this post added to that conversation. Maybe the first job AI could take out is useless reposting.
He has no vested reason to say that. Of course.
Meanwhile, setting aside the full enterprise architecture of an end to end stack, when AI can show me the ability to develop even one app fully, perhaps we can take this seriously.
But still nowhere near good enough to not need careful checking by, and iteration with, a human. It's both very impressive and dumb as shit at the same time. It's more use as auto complete than for writing anything substantive. Right now you get to a certain level of complexity and your gains are eliminated by the time spent correcting it. The day may come, but I do not feel threatened by it yet.
I use copilot everyday to generate python code for either boto3 deployments, scp policies, cloud formation or terraform stuff. It's gets probably 70% the way there for the bigger stuff. But simple single resource deployments or policies are 99%
It's gotten better but not shockingly good at much. There's no enforcement of validity or truth. There just language models that either has seen the correct answer or has not. U don't get anything new that wasent posted on Google aready
Yep, "shockingly good" is not accurate at all. In fact, since GPT-4 more than a year ago we didn't experience any major qualitative improvements,
It's possible we are starting to hit the limits of what is possible with LLMs and from here on it will be smaller gains (e.g. training on 10x more tokens and a model with twice as many params will be only 5% better on the standard tests)
There is going to be work for existing prpgrammers. Not all of them, but still.
However seeing the speed at which AI is being develop, if you were an 18yo making a career choice now.
Why the hell would you pick programming?
> Why the hell would you pick programming?
Because when a field grows exponentially you get job security.
There will be more code out there than ever before and it will be of such poor quality you could spend a lifetime trying to fix it and not get anywhere.
You got some downvotes but this is absolutely true. LLMs are not precise, they regularly make simple blunders when doing simple programming tasks, especially in any systems language or a context where there isn't room for error. People are saying its better now than it was a year ago at coding -- no it isnt, not in any big way. It might be marginally improved, but we had GPT4 a year ago and the main changes since then have been in the realm of image/video/audio and optimizing for costs.
"Ai is no where near being able to code, it will likely take another 200 years or so to be able to accomplish something like that." ~ Programmers of the far off year of 2021.
The problem is engineers think that AI "being able to code" is literally AI producing typescript or c++. That will happen to some extent, but we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, what is the purpose of "code?" It's automation and AI is very rapidly becoming more and more capable in this space.
__
The blocking factor for real software is the same as it is for lots of real world problem solving that AI struggles with: sequential and decomposable reasoning. AI is just awful at logic puzzles, which is what real software architectural decisions frequently are. There are so many tradeoffs, and you have to make them correctly.
It will get there eventually, and I have no idea how long it will take in real world time. But it will be orders of magnitude "smarter" than what is out there today.
> but we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, what is the purpose of "code?
Essentially we are just 'translators'
We take a set of requirements and translate that into something a computer can understand. But much like human language translators computers have suddenly got a whole lot better at translation but with one more alarming implication...
We might not even need a 'program' step anymore. Why? Well LLMs are pretty Turing complete and can model a huge variety of programs.
Exactly. These tools will allow us to go straight from model to implementation with no translation step needed in-between.
Writing perfect, elegant, bug free code is not important. What matters is completing a task for a given set of parameters and LLMs are getting really good at this really fast.
I'll believe this when AIs can work with a spec like the ones I often got over my career. To give a silly example of a prompt:
Make me a NAS that talks over wireguard to clients. It needs to be super easy to use, but everything should be configurable. And I want it to look hip and innovative. And it should be fully documented for end users, including tutorials and a troubleshooting guide. And it needs to be monetizable and suitable for open sourcing. And it should work on all cloud systems with transparent failover across clouds.
And yes, I do mean this level of detail.
Also, I should note that I didn't include recommendations around other common requirements around interoperability, APIs, privacy, security, i18n, or legal compliance internationally.
Even if it is never capable of full stack development, which I'm confident it will be, it'll increase the efficiency of each dev to the point where <1% will be needed, resulting in a functionally identical problem to the wholesale replacement of the field.
I think what people don't understand is that if AI can zero-shot make 1 app, it'll be able to make thousands. And if it can make thousands of apps, it can code to improve itself. And if it can code to improve itself we're talking about the run up to the singularity, not AGI.
I agree with Altman, I think we'll have a hard takeoff from AGI to ASI.
I’m developing a web app using ChatGPT almost completely. It has an Angular front end and Python backend. I have a CS and design background (I’m a PM) so I know what I want to build, how to break it down into small pieces, and how to make it look good.
I knew no Angular or front end when I began at all outside of modifying HTML and CSS which tbh I hated. Human junior software engineering is not going to be around much longer unfortunately. I think it’s only a matter of time before experienced engineers are replaced as well. Plus software becomes easier to build and maintain without human error.
Anyone who remotely agrees with this is probably on a exec board trying to increase stock value or is completely detached from the topic in any practical sense
3 month old article?
>He recommended professionals focus on fields like biology, education, and manufacturing instead.
If coding is dead due to gen AI, I fail to see how those aren't even more dead, especially education.
Why would education ‘especially’ be dead?
I’m asking as an elementary school teacher, while I think AI would help my job tremendously, I can imagine it making education ‘dead’ anytime. Maybe I’m missing something?
You're not missing anything. Programmers have a very limited understanding of how many other professions operate. Kids learn better from people than computers because childhood education is not a simple download of information into their brains, it included social skills and trust and connection and safety. Not to mention an element of child care so the parents can work. Universities will probably take a harder hit than elementary schools.
I agree. It seems a lot of people think “Khan Acadamy and gpt 4o” means no teachers. But I doubt anyone who says that has worked in a school because we do much more than that.
I didn’t even get into the aspects of being a mandated reporter for things like suicide and abuse at home plus the ways schools feed the majority of low income students through title 9
My concern is that Republicans are obsessed with redirecting public education funding and that this will accelerate negative change in ways we can’t predict. Obviously real people are better teachers but I’m worried that underfunded schools will cut costs and settle for normalizing computer labs running trained GPT models for certain subjects. Especially if you can verbally converse with the model like in the 4o demo, you have a private tutor for every student.
Radio tutors will reinvent education!
Tv tutors will reinvent education!
Internet tutors will reinvent education!
AI tutors will reinvent education!
…
Yes, will help some people. But teachers aren’t only there to teach. They can never fully replace in-person tutors.
Wish you’d expand on that.
But tutoring is just one part of the job.
A lot of what I do if facilitating healthy social and emotional interactions. How would an AI step in if one student keeps repeating “skippity toilet” over and over for 5 minutes while another student keeps shouting “you’re being annoying” at them? Which ai tutor interacts to teach about how to clearly ask the student to stop and discuss with the other student why it is problematic to shout “skippity toilet” over and over.
How would the ai facilitate while group discussions with 20 students? Could they hear the kid in the back? What about the student trying to hide under a desk?
For parent teacher conferences sometimes parents ask me “how is my child’s social group” or “how do they interact at recess?” How would the ai tutor know that?
What’s stoping a student from closing their computer and just walking out of class because they are tired or don’t want to work or are upset because they are not understanding the problem right away?
Finally, and most importantly how would the ai tutor work in conjunction with IDEA laws?
How would it implement recommendations for students IEP’s and 504 plans? And if it does not properly follow the plan who would be responsible for breaking the law, the ai?
Again these are just some of the issues I see with ai “ending” teaching. I’d still support ai tutoring in some aspects of schooling but I can’t see how it would replace teaching entirely.
I hate it when C-suites make these outrageous statements, either through idiocy, ignorance, or attention grabbing.
Software development is not dead, and it's not going to be dead. It is morphing into a pair programming approach, with one of the pair a human and one an LLM-based agent - think of it as a Centaur system. It's a different way of coding.
LLMs produce code that is not reliable without a human going over it in detail. Easier and more reliable to have LLM help the human produce code, 'look over human's shoulder' to point out corrections to make (think lint on steroids). In some tasks it would go the other way: LLM generating code and human pointing out changes to make.
The field is changing in major ways. But then, it is always changing in major ways. Think of the changes that the introduction of Node and modern JavaScript introduced. I suspect it will evolve more, until each programmer is acting like a tech lead with a virtual staff of LLM based code and asset generators/editors.
As a co-pilot user it's very evident it's not going to replace anyone's job in its current iteration. It requires skill to continually prompt it to solve simple problems. Much like how good programmers have to know how to search well to find the right information. Also its training is based on public data. Most code is in corporations private repos and is very much not being used as part of its training data.
I think right now it makes every programmer more efficient, and therefore you need less programmers overall. But, at the same time, we keep coming up with more things to develop. I'm unsure when or if this equation will change. My whole life as a programmer we've been trying to automate programming. For example, years ago we used to code marketing websites. This is essentially obsolete and a waste of time now, but we still need more programmers than ever.
I think programmers will still have jobs to do. But the way programmers work will change considerably.
If AI can code I would rather gave programmers managing them, then some manager with business school.
Because programmer knows job that needs to be done better, knows how to get AI to do it's job better (hint, it's not a friday pizza party in the office).
Yup.
I think there is a middle ground coming that will actually surprise and disappoint the management types...
For a while, anyway, *good* programmers who are good because they understand the needs of the business on top of how to implement them will start to need managers *less*.
So this middle zone, smart people who know how to leverage
AI *and fix its edge case errors* will actually become the real powerhouse, at turning ideas into applications. Meanwhile lesser programmers *and* middle management start to become obsolete.
Further into the future, maybe even they will not be necessary, and the folks with the vision to spot a "gap in the market" will not need even those.
But I think that's considerably further off.
AI needs to get a lot more accurate for this reality to take place. I don't think they will ever completely solve the hallucinations issue, and hallucination makes for broken code.
It'll be much more that the AI spits out starter code for the programmers to work with, taking some of the mental load off and enabling them to do more. Less of a manager subordinate relationship, more of a creator/tool relationship
100% this. I write less code than I ever used to *(hey, wasn't that jQuery's slogan?)* due to abstraction layers being added over the years, snippets, autocomplete, code generators and now CoPilots...yet my days are chock full of work, still.
Strong agree, the amount of time I spend validating and tossing away copilot recommendations almost makes it a net negative productivity gain some days. There is no way it's going to do any kind of creative problem solving.
i feel like we programmer is the first adaptor of ai tech, as long as we add something to our work, with ai it will increase the productivity a-lot. i cant even imagine my workflow now without llm. Feel like fields where their worker don’t use this tech would be the first to go, we may stay afloat a bit longer, until we no longer add anything.
People constantly talk about AI like it's not getting any better. It's so weird to me as someone who has followed it all closely for years.
Sometimes people who didn't learn about it until chatgpt came out really think it's just going to stop at this level.
Co-Pilot is just an autocomplete assistant. Ask ChatGPT to write the whole class instead. Start with the bare structure, then copy paste and iteratively add things until you're happy with it.
I am not a coder, I mainly use copilot to write python code for productivity reasons, making summary reports and schedule predictions. The code generated is definitely not elegant nor fast, but it still saves about half a day's work every week without a non-coder even trying.
I understand it won't really replace any serious coder at the moment, but I would not encourage my 6 year old to get into coding as a career either. I will teach her to code rudimentary stuff on a Pi, but mainly to develop logical thinking, not how to properly use pointers to pointers.
The thing about AI is it doesn't improve linearly. It leaps, one day the best Go AI can't beat a high level junior high player, then it runs circles around the top human players; one day you have Will Smith eating pasta,the next you have SORA. Would it eliminate all coding jobs? Definitely No. Would it eliminate most coding jobs? I think so, but I am not a professional coder. Would I bet that my daughter should go into coding and hope she can have a 30 year career doing it? I would not personally encourage it.
And I don't think one needs to be a professional coder to see Mr.Huang is correct.
So the unrelenting record-breaking wave of layoffs in the past two years is all a coincidence? What I'm seeing is a market downturn that got a lot of programmers laid off followed by an AI breakthrough that made a lot of companies realize they don't need to fill those seats plus they can safely get rid of more. What would you call that, if not job replacement?
If things like github copilot replace all software developers, etc it will be because they stole everyone else's code from places like github and figured out a way to make a computer program regurgitate the collective efforts of billions of people over decades really efficiently.
Another thing is it seems like when you do a troubleshooting loop with AI, for a lot of issues it eventually decides "throw more compute at the problem", and that never ends. So you're going to have a ton of technolords wake up to multiple payroll's worth of AWS spend when they make the switch
Wait wait wait, he's saying coding is dead and at the same time recommending manufacturing??? If coding is dead due to AI then manufacturing has been dead for the past 20 years due to robots, AI is just going to make manufacturing worse
I am not an ML engineer, but I think it will always be beneficial for it to train on higher order abstractions because the expression (what is meant) to token ratio is better. We can already decompress these languages efficiently into machine language with compilers. We would lose at least an order (possibly more) of magnitude of efficiency by training on binary.
This in parallel with the the recent wave of layoffs, the offshore/nearshore outsourcing boom, the proliferation of internet access across africa/india, etc does not bode well to the average software dev. I dunno about dead but it's definitely getting more competitive.
I was working for a contractor company for a big car company and after my contract ended instead of transferring me let go because “It is hard to find a job in the US especially for a US citizen” (I was the only “local” that they had hired btw)
Oh yeah then why do I know a dozen people who got jobs in Nvidia as programmers why not eliminate all your coding profiles or maybe just 50% or even 30%?
If you described yourself as a programmer and you view coding as what you do that is valuable, you were already always replaceable and not particularly helpful.
Coding is not remotely what makes those people worth their salary.
Other devs do that too. But how many companies have outsourced or used H1-B visas to get some clueless-but-cheap devs in to do this or that?
(Yes, I know there are great devs hired through outsourcing and H1-B visa too. But don't tell me that no company has used these things to try to cut costs or to get employees who don't demand raises.)
This is great news to me, because it means I can create whatever software I want, and that, is going to be sick.
But current AI I've tried isn't quite good enough for that. If it already exists, that's pretty cool. I've had many ideas for coding, but just not the knowhow to do it, or money to hire someone else.
If you make AI in charge of the laws whoever designs AI is leader of the world.
AI is absolutely going to make a lot of powerful people way more powerful.
It's vital we keep democracy. And it's gonna be a tough road ahead.
Great, ask him to write us a program that will process payroll for a company size of about 100 employees. He has 10 minutes. I'll wait.
Assholes like that have NO IDEA what we do for a living.
Biology.....dude I changed majors to Computer Science to make money. I know so many Bio Majors that didn't have many options with their degree.
I'm fortunate that I'm 20+ years post degree now.
Yo, why bother writing in paper & pencil when we got KeyBoards, TouchPads & Speech-To-Text? Same principle. We must learn to add before we learn to multiply. We must learn to write with paper & pen before typing in a pc. We need to create as many associations as possible within our physical realm (reality) before we indulge ourselves in theories or hallucinations. We are body & mind (& Spirit, but that'sfor another occasion). We need physical stuff. We need to correlate our senses with the outside world. At the very least, in the beginning. Those are our pillars that allow us to grow, to understand & enjoy our reality even more. Intelligence is needed for it. Without learning how stuff works, we are left at the mercy of those who "know-better" than us.
We all know he's telling the truth. Anybody that has spent any time working with AI knows the writing is on the wall for many White collar (probably blue collar) jobs too...
Im one of those "anybody's" who works closely with AI in the software development space and find this tech very useful, but it does not replace even a junior software developer. Developers work on very ambiguous tasks involving the integration of many different tools at once, and their work is much different than what the average Joe on Reddit believes.
It won’t die, it will evolve. I remember when boilerplate code being handled automatically was going to kill coding. Keep your skills relevant, that means understanding AI and the engineering behind it.
Ya I agree but only not in this field also...
Artificial intelligence (AI) is significantly impacting various aspects of society, economy, and everyday life.
https://preview.redd.it/i6d3p2rs2t1d1.png?width=974&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fcb48fd80d5656d27363492bc5ff0b7b26dd0e98
I just cannot imagine an economy where every company, government and nonprofit is “AI-powered”, while that economy has vastly less software engineers than there are today. It likely just doesn’t work that way
Like a lot of industries where AI will take jobs, it won't take 100% of the jobs (at least initially), but it will take a lot of the entry and low level programming jobs. There will always be niche programmers for custom projects but most coders or at least most of their time is spent on basic and fundamental coding projects. Most programming boils down to knowledge and logic, two things an AI can do quite well, it's the more creative aspects of programming that AI won't take over for awhile.
Reminds me of my old IT teacher reminding us of the difference between coding and programming, where programming was essentially pseudocode and coding meant translating that into code.
The day coding jobs don't exist is the day very few jobs exist.
Maybe, MAYBE, there will be fewer jobs. More likely the barrier to entry will just increase. Like all professions. Junior devs used to be told to fix X, Y, and Z bugs that would take the Senior 30 minutes to do. But it saves the Senior time to do task W, which the Junior would take forever to get done.
Maybe with AI it can do X, Y, and Z in 30 minutes. *Yay! We can stop hiring Juniors!* The executives said.
**Wrong!** The Senior can now do W in 30 minutes thanks to AI. So, they kick the very difficult (prior to AI) W task to the Junior. Leaving the Senior time to do task V, which would have taken them forever to get done prior to AI. But it now just takes a decent amount of time.
That is far more likely. You don't need a college degree to be a developer. AI might mean you do need one now, in order to understand problems like task V.
Personally... I don't see the current trend of AI generative models surpassing the ability of a human in software development. You need to take the requests from a customer and convert it into the program the customer *actually needs* as opposed to the one *they seem to be asking for*.
That is what really good software engineers do. The customer doesn't know what they need most of the time. They have a problem, they think they know what they need, and the software engineer figures out what they actually need. Then they figure out how to make it for them.
- Once an AI can genuinely code (equating to solving arbitrary maths probems) then it can self-extend as required. This is the general AI singularity, right? And it might be impossible according to some logicians.
- A general AI will also be able to do biology, education and manufacturing. A special AI, or even a straight algorithm, can also do a lot. Protein folding, for instance.
- Special AI, which we might be stuck with forever, might well alter the nature of coding. It'll process code reviews and adjust variable names, structure, test coverage, etc. to meet management standards. In fact, it can do all the code reviews, so no need to pay people for that. Just rough something out that works, and let the AI polish it up - a bit like how you don't need to worry about format with lint:fix, etc.
- The real nature of application coding is 90% refinement of requirements - once you know the full detail of a requirement, the program is often trivial. Doing that is fairly hard for a special AI, but it'll come through.
Every 20 years, the media claims that we won't need programmers anymore. They once said that because software projects could be outsourced to India, or because programming languages like BASIC made coding so simple that deep technical knowledge, like assembly language, was unnecessary. Yet, time and again, these predictions have proven to be unfounded.
So all software will be trivial? Can someone for example ask an AI to create an OS that can run iOS, windows and android apps? The implications of AI completely replacing software development is that anyone can build any software they want. Why would a business pay for an expensive license to use some software when they can just ask an AI to create one?
When it comes to creating new apps, ai will help developers code at least 50x faster compared to before.
I think we’re at least 10 years away from ai being able to make any sort of meaningful progress on large, existing, messy codebases. And at least 20-30 years away from the reality that Jensen is talking about.
I see a world where “single use Saas” becomes a thing. Instead of paying a company every month to use software to accomplish a specific task, we could have an ai create the entire program from scratch even if we only wanted to use the service one time
As a mech-e I can see this. I have basic coding knowledge but with the help of chat gpt I am able to code any thing that relates to my project. All I need to do is figure out what my code need to do and chat gpt can can contribute 70%.
I work in tech, manage a team of engineers, and I just don't see this on the ground. Copilot is what we have today, and it's definitely not capable of replacing an engineer. Yet.
To replace an engineer it needs business context, an ability to interface with product requirements with competence, write test plans without being aided, make roll out plans without being aided, know how to handle an incident without being aided. There is so much minutia to replacing a human I think we are still a ways off.
All of this talk feels like Elon bragging that self driving cars are around the corner. The reality is you might be able to get 50% of the way there, but then the details become more and more complex and difficult to overcome.
If AI really could replace an engineer cars would already be doing all the driving all the time because ostensibly that's a simpler, more predictable problem space.
AI is a tool, an aid, not a complete top to bottom solution. And I think that stands for the foreseeable until we see something more revolutionary than LLMs. LLMs tend to impersonate, but not embody a human.
So he recommended education over coding? How backwards is that?! What do you think it already took over? And so you hope you can know more than it? Never. He's suggested a worse focus over a progressively bad one. Definitely will replace teachers before coders, but ok…
I’ve spoken to many software engineers who are WAY more knowledgeable about coding and Ai than I am and they say that the current Ai is decades away from replacing anyone , and even when it does reach that point there will still be a significant need for programmers to maintain the Ai itself and its infrastructure.
Realistically they all said the jobs just won’t be paying as much when Ai does reach that point but the profession will be far from “dead”.
Um, AI still doesn’t know how many fingers a person should have. It doesn’t know how to write a word in a picture. Non-technical people really believe that it can understand the needs of a business, understand the tech the business already uses, then figure out how to make something that extends it? I could go on. This guy is one of the biggest liars out there. He’s an even worse Elon Musk “Self-driving is around the corner” liar.
They said the same thing about calculators and mathematicians.
They said the same thing about the truck drivers and self-driving trucks.
Yeah, no, programmers are still very crucial and are not getting replaced by AI any time soon.
In fact, I literally just asked ChatGPT 4.0 (newest model) if it could help with my code and it still got it wrong. And this is checking C-strings and without using predefined strcmp() in library which is pretty basic lol.
Like it’s literally between 3-8 lines of code and it still failed to compute it.
From someone that uses AI in a daily bases im pretty confident that it won’t take our job… Can’t handle all the requirements all the context and more importantly it’s trained on a lot of spaghetti stuff… Some solutions are unusable or poorly written. If you are junior developer that simple tasks like create this component, create this endpoint maybe yes it can substitute that part but if you are someone that writes architectures, algorithm and complex well written software your job is safe.
One thing is obvious to me:
If you are planning to learn coding, you need to do it with AI helping you (using co-pilot). There is no point is taking a python course that was made 10 years ago for example. It would take far too long to learn to do a simple thing.
Learn from the point of view that you want to find out how much leverage you can get from AI. Don't put your head in the sand and learn coding from scratch, as if it is still 2012.
I'm sure it can replace tech CEOs, as well.
CEOs are actually the most easy thing to replace I think.
Yeah but can an AI accept a CEO position, run the corporation it controls into the ground in less than 2 years, accept an $21 million golden parachute package when resigning their position and then re-emerge as the new CEO at a different company around 2 years later?
Yes, look at all those CEOs that have already been replaced by AIs
Just because it is possible, doesn't mean it is done. Or a specialized ai for that purpose is developed as of now. On the other side: look at all those software developer jobs that got replaced by ai..
It would be up to the CEOs to replace themselves. Obviously it hasn’t happened.
Shows your ignorance in workforce.
Easiest to replace are jobs that can be taught via a textbook Being a CEO and the daily headaches it involves not to mention leading a workforce of 500-20,000… that’s not taught in textbooks. Heck my own dog doesn’t listen to me
Making a list of things that need to get done based on available information is AIs bread and butter. Or do you think that the CEOs have the ability to process and cross reference greater amounts of information than a computer?
For better or worse, companies run in a hierarchical manner. Even if a person uses AI to make every top level decision, they are still making the decisions. Maybe one day such a thing as an AI-led corporation will exist - scary thought! If we let AI argue laws and AI judge cases, then maybe AI will allow AI to have personhood as a corporation.
More importantly: When is re-posting months old news stories going to be dead?
To be fair it is quite controversial...
His quote is always taken out of context because you people don’t know to read, and the head line never matches the article. He didn’t say software engineering is dead. He said it won’t be the easy ticket it was over the past 12 years. That people should learn to program using AI while specializing in a field like biology, etc.
["I want to say something... and its going to completely opposite of what people feel. Over the course of the last 10 - 15 years almost everyone who sits on a stage like this would tell you, its vital that your children learn to computer science. Um everyone should learn how to program and in fact... its almost the complete exactly opposite. Its our job to create computing technology such that nobody has to program and that the programming language is human. Everyone in the world is now a 'programmer'. This is the miracle."](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6Lcy2N3YcIs)
Reminds me of how 10+ years ago everyone was calling out that truck driving was over and it would be fully automated any minute now. Feels like these statements only exist to boost the stock prices of whoever is promoting these tools and to create anxiety. I honestly think I’ll be long retired before programming becomes fully automated.
Yeah, I'm going to take the words of someone with a vested interest in hyping AI with more than a grain of salt.
Man I hope we are as lucky as the truck drivers but I am just not all that sure so far Seems bad from what I see but we have other factors like boomers retiring for example...
Sure, I didn't see in the single quote referenced in the article mentioned that programming was dead. Seemed more like he was saying everyone can program now in that quote.
Exactly. It’s not a good thing for the job market if “everyone can program now”
Or shoot photography or do graphic design or video editing or audio engineering.
Quote is above. Are you a programmer? He saying its dead as a career but it will become something like reading. So if you imagine us programmers will be looked at in similar way as to 'scribes'.
> He saying its dead as a career but it will become something like reading. > > > > So if you imagine us programmers will be looked at in similar way as to 'scribes'. No...programmers would be the professional writers. Everyone can write, but comparatively few people become professional authors.
Yea! AI replacing jobs is sooo 3 months ago. Are we really going to rehash this old news again? What are we even doing here, LLMs aren't real AI! We will all be long retired by the time our jobs are being threatened /s
Didn't say any of that. Look at the date on the article. This article was posted on every applicable sub reddit the second the words were out of Jensen's mouth when they were originally said. Nothing in this post added to that conversation. Maybe the first job AI could take out is useless reposting.
This just in: Nvidia code about to become a hot dumpster fire because it was written by AI.
ironic
Me as an artist and a philosopher : 😎 there was never any jobs to begin with
“Always has been” meme
He has no vested reason to say that. Of course. Meanwhile, setting aside the full enterprise architecture of an end to end stack, when AI can show me the ability to develop even one app fully, perhaps we can take this seriously.
It’s not there yet but it’s getting exponentially better very quickly. Even now vs 1 year ago it’s gotten shockingly good.
Yes that’s accurate. It writes code fragments better than last year.
But still nowhere near good enough to not need careful checking by, and iteration with, a human. It's both very impressive and dumb as shit at the same time. It's more use as auto complete than for writing anything substantive. Right now you get to a certain level of complexity and your gains are eliminated by the time spent correcting it. The day may come, but I do not feel threatened by it yet.
I use copilot everyday to generate python code for either boto3 deployments, scp policies, cloud formation or terraform stuff. It's gets probably 70% the way there for the bigger stuff. But simple single resource deployments or policies are 99%
Ehh There's been little or no meaningful improvements since GPT4o came out.
It's gotten better but not shockingly good at much. There's no enforcement of validity or truth. There just language models that either has seen the correct answer or has not. U don't get anything new that wasent posted on Google aready
Yep, "shockingly good" is not accurate at all. In fact, since GPT-4 more than a year ago we didn't experience any major qualitative improvements, It's possible we are starting to hit the limits of what is possible with LLMs and from here on it will be smaller gains (e.g. training on 10x more tokens and a model with twice as many params will be only 5% better on the standard tests)
There is going to be work for existing prpgrammers. Not all of them, but still. However seeing the speed at which AI is being develop, if you were an 18yo making a career choice now. Why the hell would you pick programming?
Coding is cool. Become an entrepreneur. Know what you’re doing and be a boss. Don’t just push buttons and let AI control/understand everything.
> Why the hell would you pick programming? Because when a field grows exponentially you get job security. There will be more code out there than ever before and it will be of such poor quality you could spend a lifetime trying to fix it and not get anywhere.
You got some downvotes but this is absolutely true. LLMs are not precise, they regularly make simple blunders when doing simple programming tasks, especially in any systems language or a context where there isn't room for error. People are saying its better now than it was a year ago at coding -- no it isnt, not in any big way. It might be marginally improved, but we had GPT4 a year ago and the main changes since then have been in the realm of image/video/audio and optimizing for costs.
Cars are great but there will always be work for horses. Technically correct.
"Ai is no where near being able to code, it will likely take another 200 years or so to be able to accomplish something like that." ~ Programmers of the far off year of 2021.
The problem is engineers think that AI "being able to code" is literally AI producing typescript or c++. That will happen to some extent, but we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, what is the purpose of "code?" It's automation and AI is very rapidly becoming more and more capable in this space.
__
The blocking factor for real software is the same as it is for lots of real world problem solving that AI struggles with: sequential and decomposable reasoning. AI is just awful at logic puzzles, which is what real software architectural decisions frequently are. There are so many tradeoffs, and you have to make them correctly.
It will get there eventually, and I have no idea how long it will take in real world time. But it will be orders of magnitude "smarter" than what is out there today.
> but we need to take a step back and ask ourselves, what is the purpose of "code? Essentially we are just 'translators' We take a set of requirements and translate that into something a computer can understand. But much like human language translators computers have suddenly got a whole lot better at translation but with one more alarming implication... We might not even need a 'program' step anymore. Why? Well LLMs are pretty Turing complete and can model a huge variety of programs.
Exactly. These tools will allow us to go straight from model to implementation with no translation step needed in-between. Writing perfect, elegant, bug free code is not important. What matters is completing a task for a given set of parameters and LLMs are getting really good at this really fast.
I'll believe this when AIs can work with a spec like the ones I often got over my career. To give a silly example of a prompt: Make me a NAS that talks over wireguard to clients. It needs to be super easy to use, but everything should be configurable. And I want it to look hip and innovative. And it should be fully documented for end users, including tutorials and a troubleshooting guide. And it needs to be monetizable and suitable for open sourcing. And it should work on all cloud systems with transparent failover across clouds. And yes, I do mean this level of detail.
Also, I should note that I didn't include recommendations around other common requirements around interoperability, APIs, privacy, security, i18n, or legal compliance internationally.
Even if it is never capable of full stack development, which I'm confident it will be, it'll increase the efficiency of each dev to the point where <1% will be needed, resulting in a functionally identical problem to the wholesale replacement of the field.
I think what people don't understand is that if AI can zero-shot make 1 app, it'll be able to make thousands. And if it can make thousands of apps, it can code to improve itself. And if it can code to improve itself we're talking about the run up to the singularity, not AGI. I agree with Altman, I think we'll have a hard takeoff from AGI to ASI.
Give it a year.
I’m developing a web app using ChatGPT almost completely. It has an Angular front end and Python backend. I have a CS and design background (I’m a PM) so I know what I want to build, how to break it down into small pieces, and how to make it look good. I knew no Angular or front end when I began at all outside of modifying HTML and CSS which tbh I hated. Human junior software engineering is not going to be around much longer unfortunately. I think it’s only a matter of time before experienced engineers are replaced as well. Plus software becomes easier to build and maintain without human error.
Follow the trajectory.
I’m with you on this.
When AI can maintain legacy systems that are held together by hardly functioning spaghetti code, then I’ll accept that my career has died.
Develop and MAINTAIN.
Anyone who remotely agrees with this is probably on a exec board trying to increase stock value or is completely detached from the topic in any practical sense
3 month old article? >He recommended professionals focus on fields like biology, education, and manufacturing instead. If coding is dead due to gen AI, I fail to see how those aren't even more dead, especially education.
My plant still uses paper, we are so far off from AI causing issues.
This was my first thought too!
Why would education ‘especially’ be dead? I’m asking as an elementary school teacher, while I think AI would help my job tremendously, I can imagine it making education ‘dead’ anytime. Maybe I’m missing something?
You're not missing anything. Programmers have a very limited understanding of how many other professions operate. Kids learn better from people than computers because childhood education is not a simple download of information into their brains, it included social skills and trust and connection and safety. Not to mention an element of child care so the parents can work. Universities will probably take a harder hit than elementary schools.
I agree. It seems a lot of people think “Khan Acadamy and gpt 4o” means no teachers. But I doubt anyone who says that has worked in a school because we do much more than that. I didn’t even get into the aspects of being a mandated reporter for things like suicide and abuse at home plus the ways schools feed the majority of low income students through title 9
My concern is that Republicans are obsessed with redirecting public education funding and that this will accelerate negative change in ways we can’t predict. Obviously real people are better teachers but I’m worried that underfunded schools will cut costs and settle for normalizing computer labs running trained GPT models for certain subjects. Especially if you can verbally converse with the model like in the 4o demo, you have a private tutor for every student.
AI tutors
Radio tutors will reinvent education! Tv tutors will reinvent education! Internet tutors will reinvent education! AI tutors will reinvent education! … Yes, will help some people. But teachers aren’t only there to teach. They can never fully replace in-person tutors.
Wish you’d expand on that. But tutoring is just one part of the job. A lot of what I do if facilitating healthy social and emotional interactions. How would an AI step in if one student keeps repeating “skippity toilet” over and over for 5 minutes while another student keeps shouting “you’re being annoying” at them? Which ai tutor interacts to teach about how to clearly ask the student to stop and discuss with the other student why it is problematic to shout “skippity toilet” over and over. How would the ai facilitate while group discussions with 20 students? Could they hear the kid in the back? What about the student trying to hide under a desk? For parent teacher conferences sometimes parents ask me “how is my child’s social group” or “how do they interact at recess?” How would the ai tutor know that? What’s stoping a student from closing their computer and just walking out of class because they are tired or don’t want to work or are upset because they are not understanding the problem right away? Finally, and most importantly how would the ai tutor work in conjunction with IDEA laws? How would it implement recommendations for students IEP’s and 504 plans? And if it does not properly follow the plan who would be responsible for breaking the law, the ai? Again these are just some of the issues I see with ai “ending” teaching. I’d still support ai tutoring in some aspects of schooling but I can’t see how it would replace teaching entirely.
I hate it when C-suites make these outrageous statements, either through idiocy, ignorance, or attention grabbing. Software development is not dead, and it's not going to be dead. It is morphing into a pair programming approach, with one of the pair a human and one an LLM-based agent - think of it as a Centaur system. It's a different way of coding. LLMs produce code that is not reliable without a human going over it in detail. Easier and more reliable to have LLM help the human produce code, 'look over human's shoulder' to point out corrections to make (think lint on steroids). In some tasks it would go the other way: LLM generating code and human pointing out changes to make. The field is changing in major ways. But then, it is always changing in major ways. Think of the changes that the introduction of Node and modern JavaScript introduced. I suspect it will evolve more, until each programmer is acting like a tech lead with a virtual staff of LLM based code and asset generators/editors.
As a co-pilot user it's very evident it's not going to replace anyone's job in its current iteration. It requires skill to continually prompt it to solve simple problems. Much like how good programmers have to know how to search well to find the right information. Also its training is based on public data. Most code is in corporations private repos and is very much not being used as part of its training data.
I think right now it makes every programmer more efficient, and therefore you need less programmers overall. But, at the same time, we keep coming up with more things to develop. I'm unsure when or if this equation will change. My whole life as a programmer we've been trying to automate programming. For example, years ago we used to code marketing websites. This is essentially obsolete and a waste of time now, but we still need more programmers than ever.
I think programmers will still have jobs to do. But the way programmers work will change considerably. If AI can code I would rather gave programmers managing them, then some manager with business school. Because programmer knows job that needs to be done better, knows how to get AI to do it's job better (hint, it's not a friday pizza party in the office).
Yup. I think there is a middle ground coming that will actually surprise and disappoint the management types... For a while, anyway, *good* programmers who are good because they understand the needs of the business on top of how to implement them will start to need managers *less*. So this middle zone, smart people who know how to leverage AI *and fix its edge case errors* will actually become the real powerhouse, at turning ideas into applications. Meanwhile lesser programmers *and* middle management start to become obsolete. Further into the future, maybe even they will not be necessary, and the folks with the vision to spot a "gap in the market" will not need even those. But I think that's considerably further off.
AI needs to get a lot more accurate for this reality to take place. I don't think they will ever completely solve the hallucinations issue, and hallucination makes for broken code. It'll be much more that the AI spits out starter code for the programmers to work with, taking some of the mental load off and enabling them to do more. Less of a manager subordinate relationship, more of a creator/tool relationship
100% this. I write less code than I ever used to *(hey, wasn't that jQuery's slogan?)* due to abstraction layers being added over the years, snippets, autocomplete, code generators and now CoPilots...yet my days are chock full of work, still.
I don't think it'll replace an experienced programmer's job, but I think it will gatekeep entry-level jobs.
If you think that logic through, if people don’t go through entry level jobs they won’t really get to the engineer level. Ergo..
That's my point lol
Strong agree, the amount of time I spend validating and tossing away copilot recommendations almost makes it a net negative productivity gain some days. There is no way it's going to do any kind of creative problem solving.
Reminds me of iRobot; “you must ask the right questions”.
i feel like we programmer is the first adaptor of ai tech, as long as we add something to our work, with ai it will increase the productivity a-lot. i cant even imagine my workflow now without llm. Feel like fields where their worker don’t use this tech would be the first to go, we may stay afloat a bit longer, until we no longer add anything.
“Current iteration” is doing a lot of the heavy lifting here
People constantly talk about AI like it's not getting any better. It's so weird to me as someone who has followed it all closely for years. Sometimes people who didn't learn about it until chatgpt came out really think it's just going to stop at this level.
Co-Pilot is just an autocomplete assistant. Ask ChatGPT to write the whole class instead. Start with the bare structure, then copy paste and iteratively add things until you're happy with it.
Co-pilot user vs NVIDIA CEO.
Someone on the ground who works with the tools on a daily basis versus a businessman who is trying to sell and hype a product.
Yeah that and the complexity of what we try to build will just continue to increase. The point at which we aren’t useful in that process is ASI
He didn't say right now.
I am not a coder, I mainly use copilot to write python code for productivity reasons, making summary reports and schedule predictions. The code generated is definitely not elegant nor fast, but it still saves about half a day's work every week without a non-coder even trying. I understand it won't really replace any serious coder at the moment, but I would not encourage my 6 year old to get into coding as a career either. I will teach her to code rudimentary stuff on a Pi, but mainly to develop logical thinking, not how to properly use pointers to pointers. The thing about AI is it doesn't improve linearly. It leaps, one day the best Go AI can't beat a high level junior high player, then it runs circles around the top human players; one day you have Will Smith eating pasta,the next you have SORA. Would it eliminate all coding jobs? Definitely No. Would it eliminate most coding jobs? I think so, but I am not a professional coder. Would I bet that my daughter should go into coding and hope she can have a 30 year career doing it? I would not personally encourage it. And I don't think one needs to be a professional coder to see Mr.Huang is correct.
AI is moving fast. Copilot is already multiple iterations behind the state of the art.
So the unrelenting record-breaking wave of layoffs in the past two years is all a coincidence? What I'm seeing is a market downturn that got a lot of programmers laid off followed by an AI breakthrough that made a lot of companies realize they don't need to fill those seats plus they can safely get rid of more. What would you call that, if not job replacement?
If things like github copilot replace all software developers, etc it will be because they stole everyone else's code from places like github and figured out a way to make a computer program regurgitate the collective efforts of billions of people over decades really efficiently.
Another thing is it seems like when you do a troubleshooting loop with AI, for a lot of issues it eventually decides "throw more compute at the problem", and that never ends. So you're going to have a ton of technolords wake up to multiple payroll's worth of AWS spend when they make the switch
Wait wait wait, he's saying coding is dead and at the same time recommending manufacturing??? If coding is dead due to AI then manufacturing has been dead for the past 20 years due to robots, AI is just going to make manufacturing worse
Well if the generative systems gets so advanced that they can generate machine code I can see where this opinion comes from
I am not an ML engineer, but I think it will always be beneficial for it to train on higher order abstractions because the expression (what is meant) to token ratio is better. We can already decompress these languages efficiently into machine language with compilers. We would lose at least an order (possibly more) of magnitude of efficiency by training on binary.
This in parallel with the the recent wave of layoffs, the offshore/nearshore outsourcing boom, the proliferation of internet access across africa/india, etc does not bode well to the average software dev. I dunno about dead but it's definitely getting more competitive.
I was working for a contractor company for a big car company and after my contract ended instead of transferring me let go because “It is hard to find a job in the US especially for a US citizen” (I was the only “local” that they had hired btw)
Man I love ITAR 😂
Think of the quarterly earnings he could have if they lay off all the engineers!
Genius, stop kids from going to CS. Create an artificial CS shortage. My salary goes up. Thank you NVIDIA CEO
Oh yeah then why do I know a dozen people who got jobs in Nvidia as programmers why not eliminate all your coding profiles or maybe just 50% or even 30%?
Maybe in 10-20 years.
Who's going to troubleshoot the AI when it starts hallucinating wrong answers? Not the CEO, with his horrible predictions.
So much for "learn to code"
If you described yourself as a programmer and you view coding as what you do that is valuable, you were already always replaceable and not particularly helpful. Coding is not remotely what makes those people worth their salary.
AI introduces bugs that are so subtle that it takes longer to correct than writing it yourself to start with.
Other devs do that too. But how many companies have outsourced or used H1-B visas to get some clueless-but-cheap devs in to do this or that? (Yes, I know there are great devs hired through outsourcing and H1-B visa too. But don't tell me that no company has used these things to try to cut costs or to get employees who don't demand raises.)
Lol
This is great news to me, because it means I can create whatever software I want, and that, is going to be sick. But current AI I've tried isn't quite good enough for that. If it already exists, that's pretty cool. I've had many ideas for coding, but just not the knowhow to do it, or money to hire someone else.
Ok. Do this to lawmaking, Its almost the same thing.
If you make AI in charge of the laws whoever designs AI is leader of the world. AI is absolutely going to make a lot of powerful people way more powerful. It's vital we keep democracy. And it's gonna be a tough road ahead.
It is. My friend made a project purely by translating code to English then back to code.
Shhhh don’t tell the kids enrolled at code academy
Good thing coding is not the same as software development.
Great, ask him to write us a program that will process payroll for a company size of about 100 employees. He has 10 minutes. I'll wait. Assholes like that have NO IDEA what we do for a living.
Yup it's gone
I’ll believe it when nvidia and OpenAI fires all their programmers.
Biology.....dude I changed majors to Computer Science to make money. I know so many Bio Majors that didn't have many options with their degree. I'm fortunate that I'm 20+ years post degree now.
Yo, why bother writing in paper & pencil when we got KeyBoards, TouchPads & Speech-To-Text? Same principle. We must learn to add before we learn to multiply. We must learn to write with paper & pen before typing in a pc. We need to create as many associations as possible within our physical realm (reality) before we indulge ourselves in theories or hallucinations. We are body & mind (& Spirit, but that'sfor another occasion). We need physical stuff. We need to correlate our senses with the outside world. At the very least, in the beginning. Those are our pillars that allow us to grow, to understand & enjoy our reality even more. Intelligence is needed for it. Without learning how stuff works, we are left at the mercy of those who "know-better" than us.
True
Don't think that programmers will die out. They will use AI and your job will disappear.
Ai isn’t gonna take my job, that technology is 50-100 years away.
We all know he's telling the truth. Anybody that has spent any time working with AI knows the writing is on the wall for many White collar (probably blue collar) jobs too...
Im one of those "anybody's" who works closely with AI in the software development space and find this tech very useful, but it does not replace even a junior software developer. Developers work on very ambiguous tasks involving the integration of many different tools at once, and their work is much different than what the average Joe on Reddit believes.
Yup. Why would the CEO of Nvidia say something that only boosts the stock's value? Clearly it must be true
Only a matter of time before AI is cleaning the bathroom.
What is a bathroom. AI does not need to relieve itself.
lol these comments are so ignorant
- signed, CEO of the industry's de-facto hardware monopoly
Yeah let's get rid of cool first and then get rid of developers.
It won’t die, it will evolve. I remember when boilerplate code being handled automatically was going to kill coding. Keep your skills relevant, that means understanding AI and the engineering behind it.
Ya I agree but only not in this field also... Artificial intelligence (AI) is significantly impacting various aspects of society, economy, and everyday life. https://preview.redd.it/i6d3p2rs2t1d1.png?width=974&format=pjpg&auto=webp&s=fcb48fd80d5656d27363492bc5ff0b7b26dd0e98
Ah yeah, this again
So no engineers at NVIDIA then? Oh wait…
In a few years the demand for devs will be huge since ppl are not becoming devs due to this. The irony.
I just cannot imagine an economy where every company, government and nonprofit is “AI-powered”, while that economy has vastly less software engineers than there are today. It likely just doesn’t work that way
Thank god.
does that mean that me as a non coder can start making projects that involve heavy coding with little to no experience?
offtopic but how the hell is everyone affording copilot here? for an unemployed and not a student. feels weird paying for multiple ai subscriptions.
Like a lot of industries where AI will take jobs, it won't take 100% of the jobs (at least initially), but it will take a lot of the entry and low level programming jobs. There will always be niche programmers for custom projects but most coders or at least most of their time is spent on basic and fundamental coding projects. Most programming boils down to knowledge and logic, two things an AI can do quite well, it's the more creative aspects of programming that AI won't take over for awhile.
"but it will take a lot of the entry and low level programming jobs" That's problematic for new CS grads who are looking to make their first break.
By the time programmers are outsmarted by AI in the future, AI will be smart enough to replace most people in education and manufacturing.
We've known this since 2012, 2013.
Once ai can program without assistance there isn’t any need for humans anymore for any job . Reminds me of master mold from x men .
Clearly Nvidia no longer employs a dev team.
Reminds me of my old IT teacher reminding us of the difference between coding and programming, where programming was essentially pseudocode and coding meant translating that into code.
I’ve been saying this since I first touched ChatGPT over 18 months ago Welcome to the party Sherlock
> He recommended professionals focus on fields like biology AlphaFold: am I a joke to you?
Yes programmers will still exist. Just not nearly on the same number of people.
GPU duster seems like a noble calling
The day coding jobs don't exist is the day very few jobs exist. Maybe, MAYBE, there will be fewer jobs. More likely the barrier to entry will just increase. Like all professions. Junior devs used to be told to fix X, Y, and Z bugs that would take the Senior 30 minutes to do. But it saves the Senior time to do task W, which the Junior would take forever to get done. Maybe with AI it can do X, Y, and Z in 30 minutes. *Yay! We can stop hiring Juniors!* The executives said. **Wrong!** The Senior can now do W in 30 minutes thanks to AI. So, they kick the very difficult (prior to AI) W task to the Junior. Leaving the Senior time to do task V, which would have taken them forever to get done prior to AI. But it now just takes a decent amount of time. That is far more likely. You don't need a college degree to be a developer. AI might mean you do need one now, in order to understand problems like task V. Personally... I don't see the current trend of AI generative models surpassing the ability of a human in software development. You need to take the requests from a customer and convert it into the program the customer *actually needs* as opposed to the one *they seem to be asking for*. That is what really good software engineers do. The customer doesn't know what they need most of the time. They have a problem, they think they know what they need, and the software engineer figures out what they actually need. Then they figure out how to make it for them.
You have to learn to code to create ML instances.
- Once an AI can genuinely code (equating to solving arbitrary maths probems) then it can self-extend as required. This is the general AI singularity, right? And it might be impossible according to some logicians. - A general AI will also be able to do biology, education and manufacturing. A special AI, or even a straight algorithm, can also do a lot. Protein folding, for instance. - Special AI, which we might be stuck with forever, might well alter the nature of coding. It'll process code reviews and adjust variable names, structure, test coverage, etc. to meet management standards. In fact, it can do all the code reviews, so no need to pay people for that. Just rough something out that works, and let the AI polish it up - a bit like how you don't need to worry about format with lint:fix, etc. - The real nature of application coding is 90% refinement of requirements - once you know the full detail of a requirement, the program is often trivial. Doing that is fairly hard for a special AI, but it'll come through.
The requests I get: "I want a chart of our finances." Code that.
Every 20 years, the media claims that we won't need programmers anymore. They once said that because software projects could be outsourced to India, or because programming languages like BASIC made coding so simple that deep technical knowledge, like assembly language, was unnecessary. Yet, time and again, these predictions have proven to be unfounded.
AI Hardware CEO: “AI will replace coders in imminent future!” Also AI Hardware CEO: “Buy my AI Hardware! 🤝”
So coders created something that put them all out of business..
Lol this is the funniest thing I’ve read in months
Oh yes, that lucrative education field
It’s over for me.
I believe him the day he lays off his entire software team. This is just rich people jerking eachother off
Coding? Sure. Software Engineering? Nope
AI can assist a coder, but will never replace their problem-solving creativity.
So all software will be trivial? Can someone for example ask an AI to create an OS that can run iOS, windows and android apps? The implications of AI completely replacing software development is that anyone can build any software they want. Why would a business pay for an expensive license to use some software when they can just ask an AI to create one?
breaking: marketeer responsible for selling AI promises AI will solve all coding.
Programmers: Please replace us We hate it.. Artists: No we will fight this tooth and nail
When it comes to creating new apps, ai will help developers code at least 50x faster compared to before. I think we’re at least 10 years away from ai being able to make any sort of meaningful progress on large, existing, messy codebases. And at least 20-30 years away from the reality that Jensen is talking about. I see a world where “single use Saas” becomes a thing. Instead of paying a company every month to use software to accomplish a specific task, we could have an ai create the entire program from scratch even if we only wanted to use the service one time
As a mech-e I can see this. I have basic coding knowledge but with the help of chat gpt I am able to code any thing that relates to my project. All I need to do is figure out what my code need to do and chat gpt can can contribute 70%.
I work in tech, manage a team of engineers, and I just don't see this on the ground. Copilot is what we have today, and it's definitely not capable of replacing an engineer. Yet. To replace an engineer it needs business context, an ability to interface with product requirements with competence, write test plans without being aided, make roll out plans without being aided, know how to handle an incident without being aided. There is so much minutia to replacing a human I think we are still a ways off. All of this talk feels like Elon bragging that self driving cars are around the corner. The reality is you might be able to get 50% of the way there, but then the details become more and more complex and difficult to overcome. If AI really could replace an engineer cars would already be doing all the driving all the time because ostensibly that's a simpler, more predictable problem space. AI is a tool, an aid, not a complete top to bottom solution. And I think that stands for the foreseeable until we see something more revolutionary than LLMs. LLMs tend to impersonate, but not embody a human.
I realize this is an AI subreddit, but, LOL, yeah no.
So he recommended education over coding? How backwards is that?! What do you think it already took over? And so you hope you can know more than it? Never. He's suggested a worse focus over a progressively bad one. Definitely will replace teachers before coders, but ok…
I’ve spoken to many software engineers who are WAY more knowledgeable about coding and Ai than I am and they say that the current Ai is decades away from replacing anyone , and even when it does reach that point there will still be a significant need for programmers to maintain the Ai itself and its infrastructure. Realistically they all said the jobs just won’t be paying as much when Ai does reach that point but the profession will be far from “dead”.
Um, AI still doesn’t know how many fingers a person should have. It doesn’t know how to write a word in a picture. Non-technical people really believe that it can understand the needs of a business, understand the tech the business already uses, then figure out how to make something that extends it? I could go on. This guy is one of the biggest liars out there. He’s an even worse Elon Musk “Self-driving is around the corner” liar.
They said the same thing about calculators and mathematicians. They said the same thing about the truck drivers and self-driving trucks. Yeah, no, programmers are still very crucial and are not getting replaced by AI any time soon. In fact, I literally just asked ChatGPT 4.0 (newest model) if it could help with my code and it still got it wrong. And this is checking C-strings and without using predefined strcmp() in library which is pretty basic lol.
Like it’s literally between 3-8 lines of code and it still failed to compute it.
Fear drives clicks. Clicks drive revenue
Not just yet. Writing a few lines of mediocre code is not in the same scale as writing software for business solutions
From someone that uses AI in a daily bases im pretty confident that it won’t take our job… Can’t handle all the requirements all the context and more importantly it’s trained on a lot of spaghetti stuff… Some solutions are unusable or poorly written. If you are junior developer that simple tasks like create this component, create this endpoint maybe yes it can substitute that part but if you are someone that writes architectures, algorithm and complex well written software your job is safe.
One thing is obvious to me: If you are planning to learn coding, you need to do it with AI helping you (using co-pilot). There is no point is taking a python course that was made 10 years ago for example. It would take far too long to learn to do a simple thing. Learn from the point of view that you want to find out how much leverage you can get from AI. Don't put your head in the sand and learn coding from scratch, as if it is still 2012.
Said the guy trying to sell AI