We hire junior devs, but not senior, and dont replace our senior devs. So our developer base is moving towards being junior weighted with less senior. The reason being a junior dev is cheaper, complains less, is more capable now through utilising generative AI, works harder to impress knowing they arent in a safe position, and we can let them go more easily with less process and less reasons needed to be given.
you're so wrong. This only works if what you do is so simple that any junior develper can sufficiently do it well. Senior developers with AI is gonna destroy a bunch of junior developers with AI.
wrong? I'll gladly continue this 'wrong' approach if it continues to be as successful as it has over the last 6 months. Aswell as it being entertaining seeing the level of cope among 'senior' developers watching someone on 1/4th of their salary design systems better than they can
I recognize I’m not going to change your mind on this, but I’ll sure be interested to hear how all those systems are working in a year or two - although from your comments elsewhere, you run a consultancy, so I guess that’s not your problem, either.
Many people without experience ask this same question.
It isnt relevant. They arent just producing code and pushing it, saying it works. It undergoes the same extensive testing for stability and security as the solution written by anyone else goes through. If it passes that, then its as likely to have issues further down the line as the solution written solely by the senior dev would have.
Theyre getting paid and have a job. If they dont like that deal they can go find another one elsewhere.
But its going to get increasingly difficult to justify promoting them to higher salaries if generative AI continues as it is, as the bottom line is that there will be another junior dev out there that will do the role on less.
That would defeat the purpose. The whole point is to reduce costs by getting a cheap junior dev and having them operate AI to produce the same or better result for far less
So the point is to use technological advancements only to increase company profit and not pass any on to the actual workers. If a junior costs 1/4 of a senior, they could easily paid more from the 3/4s saved (since they're also more valuable now), but I guess shareholder millions come first.
Apathy? More like the fact that the majority of people are too lazy, not motivated enough, not willing to take risks, and go out and build something of their own that results in wealth, and prefer to sit safe as someones employee, complaining about 'wealth inequality'
It's interesting to watch you put zero value on work/effort/labor and huge value on risk taking (which is very different for people with different "safety nets").
While The Thin Red Line is fantastic, I share your dislike of Days of Heaven. Lauded as a masterpiece, when I finally watched it I couldn't understand how.
His secret to success was doing nothing for 20 years and letting idiots build him into a genius in the void of anything which would have demonstrated otherwise
Oh, they will think up something, and gullable useful idiots will continue to believe they actually believe that stuff, whilst they rake in the money from content engagement, laughing at the idiots trying to convince them the earth isnt flat for the 9000th time
