It's true, but the tech industry doesn't need the best engineers. Most of the world runs on average and good enough. If your average engineer + inference gets similar results at the same or cheaper cost, the economics are the incentive.
I find it equal parts humorous and tragic as a non software engineer who has watched for some time (~10-15 years) software engineers argue they don't need guilds, unions, etc, ("that just keeps potentially good folks out of the industry"), and that the meritocracy is real and will ensure the "right" outcome (good engineers will be rewarded economically and with longevity, broadly speaking). Tragic. "Surely the leopards would never eat my face." Business will find someone cheaper to run the power looms if they can, labor is almost always their largest expense.
> “Many of us became software engineers because we found our identity in building things. Not managing things. Not overseeing things. Building things. With our own hands, our own minds, our own code.”
It's just a paycheck, your job is not who you are. One can still build and make, but one might not be able to make a career out of it, like an artist or a journalist. These builders were simply necessary and useful until they could automate the kingmaker. They made software for joy and fulfillment, business wants software (and automation in general) for revenue and profits without labor. Software engineers are simply having their offshoring and globalization moment US blue collar builders, makers, and craftsmen had when American Capitalism decided profits and consumer excess were more important than cultivating builders and makers.
The best engineers never botsit, they use the bot to do work. If you're botsitting, you need to level up your knowledge.
Like has been said elsewhere, some folks do have a skill issue. So far my observation is that the people who are having a skill issue now are (mostly) the same folks who had a skill issue before.
AI is just new technology. We either adopt it or become irrelevant.
tonkkatonka•47m ago
toomuchtodo•43m ago
I find it equal parts humorous and tragic as a non software engineer who has watched for some time (~10-15 years) software engineers argue they don't need guilds, unions, etc, ("that just keeps potentially good folks out of the industry"), and that the meritocracy is real and will ensure the "right" outcome (good engineers will be rewarded economically and with longevity, broadly speaking). Tragic. "Surely the leopards would never eat my face." Business will find someone cheaper to run the power looms if they can, labor is almost always their largest expense.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Luddites
> “Many of us became software engineers because we found our identity in building things. Not managing things. Not overseeing things. Building things. With our own hands, our own minds, our own code.”
It's just a paycheck, your job is not who you are. One can still build and make, but one might not be able to make a career out of it, like an artist or a journalist. These builders were simply necessary and useful until they could automate the kingmaker. They made software for joy and fulfillment, business wants software (and automation in general) for revenue and profits without labor. Software engineers are simply having their offshoring and globalization moment US blue collar builders, makers, and craftsmen had when American Capitalism decided profits and consumer excess were more important than cultivating builders and makers.
https://thenewkingmakers.com/ | https://web.archive.org/web/20180619052902/http://try.newrel... [pdf]
https://a16z.com/why-software-is-eating-the-world/
_doctor_love•33m ago
Like has been said elsewhere, some folks do have a skill issue. So far my observation is that the people who are having a skill issue now are (mostly) the same folks who had a skill issue before.
AI is just new technology. We either adopt it or become irrelevant.
Is it fair? No. Is it life? Yes.