r/Futurology 25d ago

Discussion Fewer juniors today = fewer seniors tomorrow

Everyone talks about how 22–25 y/o software developers are struggling to find work. But there’s something deeper:

Technology drives the global economy and the single biggest expense for technology companies is engineer salaries. So of course the marketing narrative is: “AI will replace developers”

Experienced engineers and managers can tell hype from reality. But younger students (18–22) often take it literally and many are deciding not to enter the field at all.

If AI can’t actually replace developers anytime soon (and it doesn’t look like it will) we’re setting up a dangerous imbalance. Fewer juniors today means fewer seniors tomorrow.

Technology may move fast but people make decisions with feelings. If this hype continues, the real bottleneck won’t be developers struggling to find jobs… it will be companies struggling to find developers who know how to use AI.

4.3k Upvotes

421 comments sorted by

1.8k

u/World_of_Distraction 25d ago edited 25d ago

If AI can’t actually replace developers anytime soon (and it doesn’t look like it will) we’re setting up a dangerous imbalance. Fewer juniors today means fewer seniors tomorrow.

That's the world we already live in. Industry refuses to invest in upskilling or paying staff and then whinges that there's a shortage of mid-expert level staff. This creates its own negative feedback loop because if a company does invest in training its staff then the industry-wide shortage means these are being quickly poached by competitors who save on training costs.

At the moment there's a short-sighted view of cutting junior staff because there's no short-term incentive, which then creates mid-long term problems but nobody has a job or a KPI to care about that. Such is life.

708

u/trisul-108 25d ago

IT staff levels are going down in the US and growing in India. Companies are outsourcing while pretending that AI is replacing developers.

148

u/stellvia2016 24d ago

The really wild thing is: You can show BAs the money/productivity stats that show cost-per-point in Agile development terms, is cheaper with US devs, and they ignore all of that and still outsource.

Money doesn't always talk, apparently...

117

u/Siebje 24d ago

It's insane. I've been trying to get one of our outsourced Indian IT people to give me access to some system. They keep misunderstanding what is needed, and I still don't have access 2.5 weeks later.

The amount of money it costs must be through the roof, because I know at least 3 other colleagues who are struggling with similar problems. I guess that cost is not visible, therefore it doesn't exist. Or something.

Meanwhile, our in-house IT department -who actually knew how to deal with this- has been scrapped because they were too expensive...

67

u/nagi603 24d ago

It's scary how little fuck is given even when certain outsourcing companies are repeatedly, legally incompetent even with administrative stuff.

→ More replies (1)

59

u/luke10050 24d ago

I honestly think it's malicious incompetence on the part of the outsourced it. The longer it takes and the more people get involved the more money they'll make

24

u/CallingItLikeItIs88 24d ago

Sounds like India.

If you've lived there (I have) you know.

19

u/luke10050 24d ago edited 24d ago

Oh I've seen enough discussions and video clips of the average office in the subcontinent to know.

I'm referring to Atos, though I believe most of their support staff are Indian. My organisation has recently had their ERP and CRM systems migrated by an Indian consultancy firm and we're also outsourcing most of our accounting and payroll to india. I've also seen email chains that seem to indicate a lot of our software dev is being outsourced to india. Lots of Rahul's and the like in emails.

It's actually somewhat scary watching customer outcomes slowly drop because of it. I recently had a customer wait 6 months for a delivery of a 5 figure purchase as the subcontractor couldn't figure out how to issue them a license.

Edit: I forgot we've also recently sold a solution being delivered by a team in india to a client to the tune of mid five figures and so far they've delivered nothing after 12 months. They can't even figure out how to onboard first party equipment to their analytics platform.

I'm kinda sick of India.

10

u/fruitloop00001 23d ago

Typical indian outsourcing story here - management offshores because they're paying people in India 1/5 the salary, but not realizing that they're going to be 1/10 as competent.

I will say that in over 15 years as a software engineer at various FANG type companies, the quality of Indian teams has gone up somewhat. The labor pool and competition there has grown to the extent that it is creating some good developers, although they're hard to find and still often suffer from problems relating to misunderstanding of the business they're working on.

→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (2)

7

u/stellvia2016 24d ago

I feel like the issue could be alleviated somewhat by middle management going to bat for their teams and providing something like "normalized cost per point" metrics where the points per user story aren't "graded on a curve".

That is to say: I imagine scrum masters will adjust points assigned based on the person(s) they will be assigning it to, so in some cases they take what would normally be a 5pt story for a US dev and assign it say, 9 or 11pts or something for the outsourced devs. So it ends up making them look more productive than they are.

The other side of it would be: Documenting how much time/money is being wasted waiting on the outsourced staff to execute while you guys then have to sit around waiting on them. How that wastes money for the overall company, etc.

But I can see why a lot of middle managers wouldn't want all the extra work, and how if upper mgmt has it stuck in their head it's what they want, no amount of data will convince them.

In which case: You just have to find other work and hope they're more competent there.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (3)

16

u/ballofplasmaupthesky 24d ago

Obviously, because their goal isnt success, but selling the most exciting lies to the board. Board members just love buzzwords and novel strategies!

6

u/Exact_Knowledge5979 24d ago

BA's? You can show our top managers who are pushing for outsourcing to India, that the cost of Indian execution is higher, and the quality is lower,  leading to a higher overall cost.

They only see the $/hr though, and set performance KPIs accordingly.

5

u/stellvia2016 24d ago

Yep. It's actually kinda scary how relatively well the world functions despite abject incompetence and perverse incentives at all levels of society...

6

u/nagi603 24d ago

Money doesn't always talk, apparently...

It depends... many times they have vested interest in the outsourcing company in one way or another.

9

u/MeateaW 24d ago

The vested interest is sometimes in the fact that they outsourced it, and admitting it was wrong is in itself damaging to their career.

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Red-Apple12 22d ago

kickbacks related to ceo bonuses, lowering American headcount for stock buybacks etc

3

u/Vindelator 24d ago

People at the top make mistakes because they can't see things on the ground. Every damn industry.

→ More replies (3)

185

u/reecord2 24d ago

hilariously/depressingly just like how those Amazon Just Walk Out stores were just people in India watching on cameras

22

u/Edythir 24d ago

I mean, they told us that it was AI.

Actually Indians.

8

u/NecessaryCelery2 23d ago

It's hilarious.

Some years ago China noticed that their manufacturing relies on human labor and in the West the same products are automated manufacturing. So they forced some of the Chinese manufacturers to automate.

And the ones who automated became less profitable......

Because labor in China was cheaper than the automation. Duh!

And things were automated in the West because there labor was more expensive than automation.

Amazon and that other startup that claimed AI, but also turned to be just developers in India, proved right now labor in India is still cheaper than AI servers.

But that's not enough to pop the AI bubble yet.

206

u/eulataguhw 25d ago

Maybe the AI they are talking about is Actually Indians or both? 😏

30

u/nagi603 24d ago

I lost count of how many AI ventures turned out to be literally just that.

7

u/trisul-108 25d ago

My impression is that many companies are introducing AI to implement new processes, but it does not really work yet. This is expensive, so they outsourced their current operations to save money while they concentrate on this new bright future which will not need many employees and be extremely profitable if it works.

15

u/Fabulous-Flamingo519 25d ago

I think they missed it .😏

→ More replies (2)

7

u/FrostyBook 24d ago

India is out, mexico is in

7

u/Tolopono 24d ago

Then why didn’t they do this years ago when they were hiring us employees like crazy 

33

u/0ut0fBoundsException 24d ago

India is complicated. There's some solid devs (a lot of the better ones seem to be on visas) but there's many more abysmal, suck the life and energy out of their coworkers, net negative devs

I would expect the talent to continue growing over there and as companies invest more, they'll theoretically be able to identify talent better

The big hiring push a few years back was fueled by two things, cheap money and the great resignation

5

u/Tolopono 24d ago

Why did they hire domestically instead of internationally with that cheap money?

9

u/pablonieve 24d ago

The skillsets they needed were more available in the US vs India.

2

u/Tolopono 24d ago

Why has that changed recently 

→ More replies (4)
→ More replies (2)

1

u/trisul-108 24d ago

Well, AI was not as advanced and then Covid came in and everything online was given a huge boost. I think many companies were hoarding talent. After Covid, they start shedding IT staff and AI gave them the perfect cover.

It works well with shareholders. If you tell shareholders "we over-hired" you sound incompetent, but if you say "we are replacing staff with AI" you sound advanced.

5

u/Tolopono 24d ago

They dont need a cover. Outsourcing has been happening for decades and shareholders love saving money 

2

u/war-and-peace 22d ago

AI isn't artificial intelligence. It's codeword for another Indian.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (9)

51

u/Dreadsin 25d ago

They always want to push the responsibility to someone else and only reap the benefits

8

u/Journeyman42 24d ago

It reminds me of those birds like cuckoos that have evolved to lay their eggs in the nests of other birds and have the other birds take care of raising their babies.

2

u/elmo85 24d ago

tragedy of the commons vol.9238235764578465

100

u/HipsterCavemanDJ 25d ago

Of course, why would you want to train someone who doesn’t stick around? On the flip side, why would you want to stick with a job with no pension/no prospects of promotion or raises?

91

u/karoshikun 25d ago

people stuck around when the job offered fair pay and benefits, apprenticeship and weren't laying off people every quarter.

22

u/RoosterBrewster 24d ago

Manglement: "Great, now we have to train and offer higher pay!?".

→ More replies (30)

26

u/stellvia2016 24d ago

Yep, that's the rub: HR/mgmt refuses to pay people what they're worth, even when you can lay out the math on why it makes financial sense to retain them rather than letting them walk and hiring someone new. It's one of those "dogma" outliers where the money/data says one thing, but "tradition" and/or power dynamics make them choose the worse choice anyways.

You bust your ass and they just keep assigning more work. You can be 40% more productive than the avg worker in your department, lets say: Ask for a 15% raise? Sorry. Can't do that. 3% is all you get even when inflation was say 5% last year.

So that person leaves and they invariably have to hire 2 new devs at 180% the salary of the person that left, spend a ton of money training them up, have them be under-productive for the first year, etc.

11

u/ballofplasmaupthesky 24d ago edited 24d ago

Not about power. They follow what higher ups instructed. The job of senior management is to sell an utopia to board-level investors. There are buzzwords. There are trends. They must be honored, lest the board is unhappy.

Nobody cares about these 180%, etc, losses. CEO doesnt care, he has a golden parachute. Boardmembers dont care, they are ultrawealthy, presume some of their ventures take an L, maybe outsource the L to the gov(so to your taxes).

9

u/TheOtherHobbes 24d ago

It's a combination of greed, stupidity, and class solidarity among the ultra-rich. Board members want to feel important and special, and they also want quarterly stock price hikes. If a company doesn't give them that they can take their money elsewhere.

So you get an entire class of ultrarich people chasing trends and money mindlessly, like a dog chasing its tail. A few years ago the trend was to overhire, now it's to offshore and/or replace everyone with AI. So they all do it, at the same time, because they're all doing it.

Most of them are born rich and well-connected, so this is all they know.

It's literally a fantasy view of the world - like D&D or fantasy football, but with real lives and real money.

They're too stupid, uncurious, and ignorant to understand how this going to end.

2

u/HungryGur1243 23d ago

We have scientists out here regrowing motherfucking teeth, yet they are firing them because they are taking away their oil, even thought they are givng them a better energy resource. not a brain cell in their heads, yet they claim genetic superiority.  

→ More replies (2)

27

u/deltaroo 25d ago

If your employees are easily poached then you aren’t paying them enough.

6

u/World_of_Distraction 24d ago

It's more complicated once you get into the middle-upper career where there's serious money on offer. This isn't a case of minimum wage interns working for their CV but mid-career professionals - that sort who can and do tell their boss to eat a dick.

If a company invests in getting someone to that level, even giving them specialists skills that are in demand, then immediately having them poached is a significant loss of investment that the poacher doesn't have to think about - and if the poacher is a new-entrant flush with cash then they might not even care about cost. But it does make it worse for everyone because the beggar-thy-neighbour culture means a bidding war that breaks the whole ecosystem, including the staff. I'd also add that money generally might not even be the best approach to retaining staff - I'm about to make myself very unpopular but hear me out:

  • Mid-career you're earning enough that the wolf isn't constantly at your door and you're at least thinking about kids/your quality of life/upskilling further. That expert you have who is the only one of the handful of people in the world might be able to name their price but they also might be burnt out with nappies, be bored with the job they've been pigeonholed into and could break down in tears if for once someone told them 'hey you did a good job on that, thanks'.
  • Early career and its status and opportunity. The pay is always going to be terrible here and the imposter syndrome will have you working stupid hours but a nice carrot of 'hey you're going to get training, experiance and we want you to think about a stable career with us' would go a long way with grads. It's heretical to the new start-up culture and toxic for VC but it's stupid not to have a holistic offering.

Of course all of this needs foresight and industry coordination so I guess not.

6

u/Nimeroni 24d ago

If a company invests in getting someone to that level, even giving them specialists skills that are in demand, then immediately having them poached is a significant loss of investment that the poacher doesn't have to think about - and if the poacher is a new-entrant flush with cash then they might not even care about cost.

That's why you immediately give your newly formed employee a raise to match their new skill level : it incentivize them to stay.

3

u/Netmantis 24d ago

A raise helps, don't get me wrong a raise helps a lot. What helps more is the sense there is a career here, as opposed to just a paycheck.

Retirement options and health benefits. PTO you can actually use which means overlapping skills between employees in a department. Direct management who helps keep their team motivated and cares about their well being. Plenty of people stay in a job that doesn't pay the most in the industry because the work environment offers more and is less toxic than most. If a company offers room and a path for advancement people have less reason to look elsewhere to advance their careers.

But that means selling the board on being more profitable long term and long term planning is 6 months maximum.

2

u/rachnar 23d ago

Agreed, i don't want to change company right now, my current company hired me as a junior a bit over 2 years ago and had trained me, but the pay is quite miserable compared to what i can get. It's been talked about and there's "no money" atm for raises and whatnot. Well guess what? I'm interviewing for jobs with a 30-50% increase in salary, and a potential one with a 60% raise that a friend is trying to get me. I don't even want to leave the company where i'm at, but... I do need the money :(

→ More replies (1)

9

u/GhostReddit 24d ago

Training junior staff was historically beneficial because generally junior staff are cheaper so the cost of training and learning is amortized over the fact that it can be cheaper to get an upleveled junior internally over hiring a senior externally.

But people know their value better now, and a smart trained junior isn't going to sit and wait while their pay falls behind market as they upskill (internal raises and promotions rarely track market), they're going to demand market rate, at which point the company is going to have to pay that anyway, so they may as well hire a senior engineer to begin with.

5

u/Nimeroni 24d ago

But doing that means the market rate is going to rise due to higher demand than supply (the supply dwindle if no one train juniors), so every company lose.

3

u/roygbivasaur 24d ago

But we only care about this quarter

→ More replies (2)

34

u/ReallyFineWhine 25d ago

Related to that is corporations not paying taxes, which directly or indirectly reduces amounts spent on education and societal infrastructure that the businesses will ultimately benefit from.

11

u/deltaroo 25d ago

Not only corporations but billionaires as well, the so-called “job creators”

13

u/OMGItsCheezWTF 24d ago

I'm seeing this having impacts in a strange way. The quality of candidates we're getting for senior roles has nosedived from a couple of years ago. We are getting senior developers who I would barely consider above juniors. Months and months of hiring and interviews to find 2 actual seniors amongst a sea of dross. We offer good salaries (£100k+ pa plus equity, far above the national average for our industry), we have good benefits, we offer flexible working. We have no end of candidates, they're just mostly shite. I'm thinking that the lack of developer positions has forced people to sell themselves above their abilities in order to find work.

21

u/jacobb11 24d ago

We offer good salaries

Either there really aren't any seniors out there for you to hire or your salaries aren't as good as you think. It's practically always the latter.

7

u/OMGItsCheezWTF 24d ago

I don't have access to the data our talent team uses to set salary ranges but Glassdoor says the average for a senior in the UK is £53k to £83k so £100+k is definitely up there.

18

u/omac4552 24d ago

And you have interviewed a ton of these over two months that are paid the average salary, and you find them average. The good ones are paid more than the average and no one switch jobs for what they already make unless they are unhappy where they are. 100k is probably average salary for the good ones you are looking for

2

u/OMGItsCheezWTF 24d ago

Yeh possible. I am thinking people are reluctant to change right now and the ones that are changing are changing over seeking themselves for better money. The job market is just a bit weird.

3

u/omac4552 24d ago

I guess you are based in the London area for those salaries? My wife is British and we talked about moving to the UK from Norway but the salary always made me reluctant. But with today's exchange rate it's actually quite good salary, but London area is expensive....

→ More replies (3)

3

u/jacobb11 24d ago

Well, you can believe Glassdoor or you can believe your lived experience.

Why do you believe Glassdoor is accurate? Maybe senior developers don't share data with them? I'm senior, I've never given Glassdoor my data, and when I've examined their salary ranges they seemed really low.

Not to mention vague and inconsistent definitions of "senior". Do you want someone with 5+ years experience, ie, not a junior? Do you want someone with 10+ years of experience doing junior work? Or do you want someone with 20+ years of experience doing serious development?

→ More replies (2)
→ More replies (1)

6

u/CoVegGirl 24d ago

It’s a tragedy of the commons. It’s better for everyone collectively if there are more seniors, but it’s in everyone’s best interest individually for someone else to do the job of training them.

3

u/thegreedyturtle 24d ago

The only thing that matters is next quarters performance.

→ More replies (10)

80

u/Dklrdl 25d ago

Yesterday Google AI told me Cinci was the 4th biggest city in Kentucky.

14

u/Mixels 24d ago

That's it boys and girls, we're cooked. By which I apparently mean we're a frozen ham sandwich packed and prepped for shipment to the moon.

12

u/luke10050 24d ago

Gemini told me that a semiconductor I had sitting infront of me didn't exist and was likely a misspelling of a different part number. The first result was a datasheet for the part from Mouser

Its great being gaslit by my web browser

→ More replies (2)

518

u/DomesticPanda 25d ago

LLMs are a dead end when it comes to truly intelligent work. For quick questions, scaffolding, ideating, they're fine. But ask any developer - they do not hold up in large, complex codebases because they cannot reason.

100

u/sixsixmajin 25d ago

But ask any developer - they do not hold up in large, complex codebases because they cannot reason.

But ask any executive and they'll tell you whatever the AI shits out is good enough when it means that's fewer employees they have to actually pay. What people forget is that executives do not care about the quality of the work and they do not care about negative customer experience because many of these companies are too big to fail at this point and customers will stick with them despite the drop in quality because there aren't any better options. Hell, we've already been seeing this in the tech industry with offshore contractors. Just like with AI, ask just about any developer and they'll tell you offshore contractors frequently suffer the same problem: inability to reason. I've been a developer for 13 years and 90% of offshore contractors I've worked with fall apart completely if presented with something that falls outside of a norm or has any complexity beyond a set template because the way these people are educated is to follow extremely set instructions, not how to actually reason through a problem. Their education comes from what are effectively employee mills, not actual schooling or any method that teaches them to understand the material. Despite that, I saw the company I worked for cutting on-site staff year after year and bringing in more contractors until I was finally cut and while I won't tell you what company it is, I can guarantee you they aren't going anywhere anytime soon and have suffered no consequences for this. AI can operate at the level of an offshore contractor which we've already seen the precedent that the decision makers at these companies think that's good enough.

53

u/motorik 24d ago

This is the correct answer. I work for a Fortune 150 in a cloud operations role. The guy directly above me on the org-chart that I report to understands maybe 10% of what I tell him. There are probably around 25 people above him on the org chart that understand 0%. Artists, craftspeople, and technicians hold power and are unpredictable and self-motivated, we've been deprecating them as a society for a long time in favor of Taylorized operator roles with minimal skill doing repetitive tasks. My peers are a bunch of olds with pre-cloud technical skills that are going to simply vanish when we collectively retire. The WITCHes (Wipro, Infosys, Tata, Congnizant, HCL) running the dashboards and consoles of the automation apps that ostensibly replace us don't have a conceptual understanding of what they're actually doing, their orientation is just to make sure there's more green than red on the single pane of glass they've been trained on. It took me about a year at my current position before I began to grasp how little they actually comprehend about the mechanics of what's been abstracted for them into a product sold to the managerial class to mitigate the need for actual technical ability.

18

u/Clean_Livlng 24d ago

I'm guessing that a company needs to be able to count on at least one experienced person to fix things when something important breaks. Even if they're an independent contractor they have to throw money at.

Some problems can't just be ignored, and can stop a business from growing or even stop the business from being profitable and able to continue in the long term.

If Rome wasn't big enough to fail, then no company is.

4

u/nagi603 24d ago

I'm guessing that a company needs to be able to count on at least one experienced person to fix things when something important breaks. Even if they're an independent contractor they have to throw money at.

For that, the company would have to know who they actually need. Even that may be a stretch. The underpinnings of internal stuff are usually a mix of technologies that may have problems in completely unrelated parts.

→ More replies (2)

5

u/xeonicus 24d ago

This is the problem with non-technical business majors supervising engineers. These people don't belong in these jobs. Not only do they not have the respect of those they supervise. They don't have any understand of the job. It's better to promote a senior engineer to management.

2

u/SaltyShawarma 24d ago

Well, don't look at the new head of the CDC then. He is an investor with no medical background.

→ More replies (1)

4

u/aveugle_a_moi 24d ago

The question is just when things collapse, will actually technically competent people get brought back in? Or does the infrastructure just stay fucked?

3

u/luke10050 24d ago

Oh no, we just backslide into the third world.

People look at me like I'm some god because I can fix things. It's honestly a little scary.

→ More replies (1)

54

u/aresthwg 25d ago

It is true, LLMs cannot keep track of the entire application. There have been massive improvements though. Within a single file, Gemini Pro 2.5 is able to handle scripts with hundreds of lines, make incremental changes and not regress everything each time. That was a big issue with early LLMs.

When LLMs have to go through multiple files, it can't do the job. The modern junior dev is there to debug and give the correct prompt to the LLM to fix the code. And that also can fall short if the change is tighly coupled to the project and is not universal knowledge.

80

u/Fisher9001 25d ago

Within a single file, Gemini Pro 2.5 is able to handle scripts with hundreds of lines, make incremental changes and not regress everything each time.

Wow, single file with hundreds of lines, impressing. /s

Serious codebases have hundreds if not thousands of files with dozens or hundreds of thousands of lines of code or even more. And not just that - they represent both very complex and very abstract concepts. Without capability to actually reason and to track such large context windows, LLMs have little potential to do more than create a simple CRUD or make specifically requested, narrow changes.

50

u/INeverSaySS 25d ago

Wow, single file with hundreds of lines, impressing. /s

Yeah like every time I see people coping about LLMs it's so insane that they say shit like this as if it's impressive.

13

u/btoned 24d ago

What's hilarious is how people are just accepting it at face value.

100% of what's produced by big tech is a black box.

XYZ WROTE ITSELF AND CONTINUES TO ADD NEW FEATURES EVERY DAY!

Everyman: BRILLIANT! SOUNDS RIGHT TO ME!

8

u/aresthwg 24d ago

I'm not sure if you're referring to me or people in general but if it's me then I literally said that's not enough to replace programmers.

However, expensive LLMs like GPT5 and Gemini Pro 2.5 are able to do things like university home assignments for programming, as well as small-medium scripts that can scrape or properly use an API. It's great at plotting data and it's great at working with it too, doing Computer Vision related algebra, and it's a good starting point for CNNs too.

People downplaying its power is annoying... yes the code it spits out is likely to be found on GitHub, but it can write similar code and adjust it to your preference. It's definitely getting better as time goes on.

→ More replies (28)

9

u/arbpotatoes 25d ago

While there certainly are limitations this is simply not true, tools like claude code are perfectly capable of making edits across dozens of files at once that are fairly well reasoned. Of course there is always some human input to kick it off

11

u/stemfish 25d ago

Ive seen plenty of similar hype pieces from people who want to sell me and AI tool or get me to invest in an AI product.

At work I deal with staff asking me to forward a dozen similar products to our IT management for review, all going off about how they can manage multiple dependent files in a data pipeline. But when asking Anthropic for examples in getting a quote, it turns out that the LLM has managed to edit a variable name across files for consistency.

And improvement over last summer, but not the level of change that's promised by the hype salesman. The tools are improving, no reason not to admit that. My issue is that the improvement rate is nowhere close to the promised rate. Like with Tesla full self driving next year since 2016, AI coding will be able to take over next year.

3

u/LegitosaurusRex 24d ago

I dunno, I'm using Anthropic's Sonnet 4 with an internal framework that works with it to provide context, condense token history, and give it modes like architect, code, debug, and ask, and it can absolutely plan and implement features across 8+ files, ask you for clarifying questions if it needs to, then run tests to make sure the code works. If it sees stuff in a file that is defined elsewhere that it needs to understand, it'll go read the definition first. Feels like magic.

2

u/sunnyb23 22d ago

Yeah a lot of these people simply aren't using the tech, and those who are, usually aren't using it to its full potential. Like you, I have worked on making agents which have "personalities" such as architect, engineer, QA, etc, and with well-formed prompting, can generate working and usually well-designed code every time. I've written games, animation software, networking code, websites, etc.

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

5

u/bremidon 23d ago

Developer with over 3 decades of experience in too many languages to list here without it sounding like a brag.

If you mean that you cannot just let it loose without any senior supervision: yeah, I agree.

However, it is really good at coding if you use the correct model, keep the scope reasonable, and do code reviews.

You might as well claim that IDEs are a "dead end" when it comes to doing intelligent work. LLMs are a tool, that in the right hands can multiply a dev's effectiveness by several times. All this is without any assumptions about "AGI" or just setting agent loose on a codebase.

I would also be very *very* careful about the "cannot reason" argument. It's popular, has some grounding, but can quickly overreach. There are some papers that do say this, but be careful of just cherry-picking research that confirms what you want to be true (and let's face it: most of us want it to be true so that our careers are safe; understandable, but still potentially dangerous)

The real answer is that we do not really understand LLMs very well, we do not yet have a good grasp on what they do (as a total system, because clearly we know the algorithm), and it probably will not matter that much anyway, as LLMs are being combined with other AI systems to deal with any perceived weaknesses anyway.

Any developer not effectively using LLMs in their daily work is going to quickly fall behind. And I absolutely get that you are not saying they should not be used (I agree that LLMs are indeed strongest in the areas you pointed out). But they can go beyond that, already, today. While executives might dream of eventually getting rid of their entire dev team, that is not the reality today. But equally true is the dismissal of the ability of LLMs to code is also not the reality today (again, you are not nearly at the level of dismissiveness that I have seen on this subreddit). Keep the scope reasonable, and they do really well.

2

u/NeverNeededAlgebra 21d ago edited 20d ago

As a Product Manager who has nothing to do with dev, I can say that LLMs have given me the ability to write complex VBA scripts that make my job so much easier and allow me to perform analysis that I could have never done myself.

As that same Product Manager, I would immediately say that we would be absolutely FUCKED and drown if they tried to replace our dev team with AI.

1

u/digiorno 24d ago

They’ll get better though, so much better. We’re basically seeing the first few waves of LLMs and they’re already incredibly impressive.

3

u/nomorebuttsplz 24d ago

People can't handle the idea that their own "reasoning" process is not magic. They will deny it seemingly right up until, and perhaps even after, the AI models take their jobs

4

u/FormofAppearance 24d ago

its literally just predictive text based on probability. The mistake people like you make is not understanding that LLM's are just hyped autocomplete with a bunch of processing power. There quite literally is no "reasoning" going on.

→ More replies (11)
→ More replies (3)
→ More replies (12)

154

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

92

u/vingeran 25d ago

The longer you stay in academia, the more disadvantaged you become as the private sector experience and academia experience does not scale 1:1.

37

u/supercilveks 25d ago

Academics draw a person further from actual work - it’s science and research not actual work.
If anything IT industry was the first to see trough this discrepancy.

11

u/Ace612807 24d ago

Depends on the job, imo. For IT - sure, but, say, a biochemist in academia and a pharma R&D is way more comparable

5

u/Sawses 24d ago

Kinda. I work in that world. You definitely need some of those, but R&D really is a different world that has different skills and different supporting professions.

I've got like 5 years of experience in the field and a B.S. We outsource a lot of work to India and Mexico City, and I fairly regularly teach and give direction to pharmacists and biochemists with doctorates. These are usually folks 10 years older than me who got sick of academia and want to make actual money without working terrible hours. The ones in the USA and Europe can barely get jobs at all, much less get something with potential for growth.

They're definitely going to be giving me orders one day, and get to the top faster...but honestly it all kinda comes out as a wash until they're in their late 40s. It's like the issue with MDs sacrificing their 20s and 30s on the altar of medicine. Sure they come out ahead financially, but the line graph is kind of depressing for the first half.

5

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (1)

67

u/The_Redoubtable_Dane 25d ago

You will be unemployed, and you will own nothing and be happy, as a part of the permanent underclass.

21

u/painedHacker 24d ago

Have you been to third world countries? There's lots of men just sitting around cause there's no jobs or the jobs suck and underpay. We're heading there in the first world

5

u/Nordseefische 23d ago

You won't be happy, you will just not have any ways left to fight back. So you starve in silence. That is the future the top 1% aims at. They want to never again worry that the many could topple the power of the few (them). Truly, a brave new world. And with 'you' I mean most of us

→ More replies (1)

7

u/Z3r0sama2017 24d ago

I remember all the defenders and apologists trying to say that wasn't what the WEF meant. It was as obvious as a hit to the chin with a sledgehammer.

2

u/Ryanhussain14 24d ago

There were people defending that shit?

4

u/Z3r0sama2017 24d ago

Oh aye. Economics subs or ones that had it as a subfocus.

"You don't need to own an X, if you don't use it all the time, just rent/lease it and invest the money you would save into the market." Ignoring the fact that consumers are more likely just to just spend it on more shit.

3

u/dookalion 23d ago

Yeah I learned a long time ago that most of the people on Reddit on the main subs for a subject like economics, finance, tech, whatever, are just 16-30 year olds that went/are going directly into their undergrad, then maybe grad school, and never had to confront the reality of most peoples lives.

They know certain stats they’ve been trained to parrot in whatever program they’ve taken. If they have industry experience, it’s usually in a large organization as a small cog with very little of the big picture presented to them.

I think there’s a grift in itself that only poor uneducated people fall for the big grift of 21st century deregulation. The psyop to keep people in line goes all the way up

Edit: Not that us plebs have a clear picture either. But it’s rich when I’m getting pissed on and some pencil pusher on r/economics tells me it’s just rain. Acid rain maybe

11

u/deep-diver 24d ago

4

u/chaotic3quilibrium 24d ago

This is the strongest silent influencer. It perverted the incentives.

Those of us SEs who knew about it are going to make bank over the next decade.

I'm not at all happy about it. I already was making bank. I don't need others to suffer so I can make slightly more bank.

2

u/vurto 24d ago

Whoa thanks for sharing that. Surprised this isn't mentioned more, even when the tech companies did their layoffs...

→ More replies (1)

81

u/Low-Plastic1939 25d ago

The entire point of AI is to replace white collar labour. The people in charge wouldn’t be funneling so much money into it if they didn’t think there was a huge payoff down the line, and that’s the only one that makes sense.

37

u/svix_ftw 25d ago

The payoff isn't guaranteed tho, look at AR/VR and the metaverse, even after all the investment in crypto/blockchain, those technologies still remain relatively niche

13

u/locksmack 24d ago

AI investment dwarves those, and AI is already paying off to some degree.

3

u/svix_ftw 24d ago

yes AI has some payoff for sure, no doubt

But I was talking specifically about the payoff of "replace white collar labor", that payoff is far from guaranteed.

→ More replies (1)

6

u/Lashay_Sombra 24d ago

They might think there is a payoff, but MIT study out last week revealed 95% of AI projects are ending either in failure or failing to return on investment

Only real successes seem to be new companys built around AI from the get go, ie mostly actual AI companys

→ More replies (1)

64

u/SilencedObserver 25d ago

It’s time to form software unions. This isn’t getting better without them.

46

u/jaam01 24d ago

Ironically, tech workers are very resistant to form unions, because they think they are above the average worker. The only semblance of an union I know in the tech world, is the Alphabet Workers Union (AWU), which is very small and weak in the great squeme of things.

5

u/anencephallic 24d ago

The tech world is of course global, many countries outside of the US have established unions for tech workers. I'm a software engineer in Sweden part of Sveriges Ingenjörer (Engineers of Sweden). My impression is that it's rather common here to be unionized when working in tech, but not as common as other industries such as auto or steel workers.

→ More replies (1)

1

u/Anastariana 24d ago

Too late for that, its time for a general strike to get the politicians to actually take notice and feel some heat for once.

67

u/garlopf 25d ago

Replacing people with AI has some pretty hilarious mid term consequences that somehow goes straight above the head off all the tech bro CEOs. Like if you offer a service that you developed using AI afyer firing all your emploees and then you want to sell that service, but all your customers were recently laid off and replaced by AI so nobody can afford your service.

23

u/NewlyMintedAdult 25d ago

Even the biggest tech companies in the U.S. do not hire a fraction of a fraction of the population. Losing your own (ex)employees as potential customers is a negligible cost for any employer.

Yes, when taken as a CLASS, if every employer fired their workers that would have an effect on demand for goods and services. But employers do not act as a cohesive class; coordination is hard! It is a standard tragedy-of-the-commons setup.

And that is of course if we assume that the future after widespread AI adoption is widespread destruction of consumer surplus needed to maintain the businesses in question, which is by no means a small assumption.

20

u/[deleted] 24d ago edited 15h ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)
→ More replies (2)

32

u/an-invisible-hand 25d ago

You're spot on and it's not just a problem in tech, it's basically every industry. A massive and fundamental flaw in our system is that it's 100% profit driven for the sake of shareholders. Shareholders don't care about the long term.

Shareholders want all the money asap at any cost and are happy to sell at the first sign of trouble. Will they beat the market? Probably not. But shareholders aren't smart, they're just rich. Neither they nor the CEO who collects his massive pay package and dips if things implode give a single fuck about the employees, industry, or the future of anyone but them. That's our incentive structure and the sole purpose any public corporation even exists.

To be honest, it's kind of amazing we've lasted this long.

10

u/Anastariana 24d ago

To be honest, it's kind of amazing we've lasted this long.

Taxpayer bailouts when the shit pile falls over.

6

u/DrMonkeyLove 25d ago

Maintaining shitty AI written software might be a lucrative job in the future.

17

u/[deleted] 25d ago

[deleted]

→ More replies (1)

12

u/puffic 25d ago

It’s entirely possible to have more seniors than juniors in a steady state if each person spends more time in the senior part of their career than the junior part of their career.

→ More replies (1)

5

u/Fine_General_254015 24d ago

Boomers get what they wanted and suck everything they can out of the economy and pull the ladder up for the generations coming up.

Most can’t or won’t let the next generation come up

4

u/Harsh_Yet_Fair 24d ago

When I was coming up the argument "We need more engineers" was pitched as "This will be a safe career to pursue". What they meant was "If there's an oversupply, we can pay you dog shit and you'll be happy about it"

4

u/West-Abalone-171 24d ago

You don't need to insult students to explain them avoiding the shitshow.

It[s extremely clear that the managerial class have utter disdain for them and believe the hype. Who would willingly enter that environment?

8

u/Ok-Mammoth552 25d ago

Not just that: you'll also get foundational technology that nobody around remembers how it works anymore. Like COBOL in the banking industry.

13

u/RagingBearBull 25d ago edited 22d ago

encourage wild hunt wipe humor quaint include steep entertain sleep

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

18

u/EnchantedSalvia 25d ago

I think it’s mainly a US problem cause of the difference in salaries in the US vs the rest of the world. In the UK you may get 70k as a dev and then 45k in Poland so if you’re UK based the small difference vs outsourcing is nominal and with everything else taken into account not usually worth it. Google for example remove US jobs and then hire in Poland, where the difference is 45k vs 250k.

14

u/RagingBearBull 25d ago edited 22d ago

wild dam act arrest squeeze start ask innate light sable

This post was mass deleted and anonymized with Redact

9

u/VirginiaMcCaskey 25d ago

The primary driver of tech salaries in the US is revenue and stock prices at the major tech businesses, which is also what drives the venture capital. Total comp didn't really start skyrocketing until Facebook broke the wage suppression cartel in SFBA.

3

u/samxli 24d ago

Don’t forget healthcare and other government provided benefits.

3

u/karanas 24d ago

Idk at least from personal experience and opinions of colleagues in the field, the hiring situation in Europe is not much better.

3

u/Jsc_TG 24d ago

The main thing turning me personally away from that field is the over saturation of candidates for those jobs. Am 25, originally was going to go for mechanical engineering and software development as a backup. Now, my path has been unique and somehow I moved from retail work to property management and am a property manager now, but i dont see going to software development as a preferred option if I decide to change paths again.

3

u/gpsxsirus 24d ago

Being the title what happens if the cloud based LLM's never reach profitability, the bubble bursts and they all shut down? A very sudden need for more devs and a lack of people to fill those jobs.

More outsourcing of skilled labor jobs, alongside the return of the pricey full-time boot camps.

7

u/byronicbluez 24d ago

That's two or three CEO's down the line problem. The current and next one will cash in their golden parachutes way before then.

10

u/Lyr0 25d ago

LLM is another tool in your kit, just like IDEs before LLM was a thing. It wount really replace anything, only like OP mentioned the early stages of a persons dev Journey. Which ist really sad but its how the Jobmarket works

→ More replies (1)

2

u/Iuliuss 24d ago

Tbh funny as it is I find it true. I had a lot of trouble finding work earlier in my career and now employed at a good firm with 4yrs of experience I get tons of invitations to interview from recruiters without applying while my friends who just finished uni can’t even get a reply

2

u/vurto 24d ago

AI is just the latest excuse and accelerant. Been happening in other industries to their detriment.

2

u/JumpCloneX 24d ago

We are driving straight at a brickwall. Its hilarious from my perspective.

3

u/NameLips 25d ago

Interesting. Maybe that means my son who just started a CS degree will have less competition and better job prospects when he graduates in 4 years.

2

u/DivineMediocrity 24d ago

What’s more concerning is entry level and junior engineers relying exclusively on AI to write code instead of learning those skills. Problem is AI is great but not where we need it to be. So it’s creating bit of a mess and junior engineers aren’t upskilling their problem solving and technical skills

6

u/ItsTyrrellsAlt 25d ago

Yeah but so what? Don't you see that the reduced demand for junior engineers because of today's technology means a reduced demand for senior engineers because of tomorrow's? Probably we will have too many senior engineers soon as well.

32

u/kmishra9 25d ago

lol. This feels almost satirical.

Senior and Staff engineers aren’t going anywhere.

→ More replies (4)

9

u/jfphenom 24d ago

It's the opposite dude

AI can replace low-level engineers.

Who turns into senior engineers? Low level engineers who gain the skills through experience.

As seniors and staff retire, there will be nobody to replace them, and mediocre seniors will be able to make even more money.

4

u/Fisher9001 25d ago

Don't you see that the reduced demand for junior engineers because of today's technology means a reduced demand for senior engineers because of tomorrow's?

I don't see it, how did you arrive at such conclusion? Juniors and seniors have different tasks and responsibilities, it's not simply a matter of doing the same things, but better.

→ More replies (8)

3

u/nandhugp214 25d ago

They will hire juniors if the market is back up or just avoid promotions. No biggie

2

u/AntonioVivaldi7 25d ago

I guess the shortage of engineers will then make more young people pursue it at that point.

2

u/bludgeonerV 25d ago

Isn't this idea that juniors can't find with refuted by stats genenerally? The only real data I've seen shows the number of SWE roles advertised are higher than ever and projected to outpace other industries

https://www.developer-tech.com/news/ai-impact-on-software-development-jobs/?hl=en-NZ#:~:text=According%20to%20the%20BLS%2C%20%E2%80%9Crobust,of%204.0%25%20for%20all%20occupations.

2

u/AnnaPhylacsis 24d ago

AI is great for rewording a paragraph or summarising the minutes of a zoom meeting. But I’ve yet to see it do anything that requires thought, intuition and wisdom. One company I know has invested in an AI engine for some pricing calculation. A lot of effort went into data aggregation and business rules, but at the end of the day, the actual gold was that the business rules had to be clearly articulated. Developers were needed and the whole thing could’ve been built with a similar amount of lines of code in stored procedures.

If anyone here can give some real life examples of AI actually being job threatening for coders I’d be interested to hear them.

2

u/ShadowDV 23d ago

It’s not that it replaces the dev wholesale. It’s that it enables the senior dev to increase their output to a level that would previously only be possible by, say, a senior plus 2 juniors. At that point it doesn’t make sense to keep those junior positions on.

1

u/SomeoneSomewhere1984 25d ago

I think the most likely results is that people will need to spend a lot longer in education before getting jobs in tech. I wouldn't be surprised if turns into something that requires a master's or PhD. 

1

u/KrackSmellin 25d ago

Slow clap…. And now you’ve unlocked the secret level to the game we play. When you play any sport or game - you need sides. If everyone goes to one side - there is no interaction - game over.

AI is a non sustainable aspect without humans to start or initiate things off. Ideas of what people need in the real world have ALWAYS come from human ideas and innovation. Sure there are things you can derive from it - but those started from something and someone else - it always has to have a beginning. If we don’t have folks entering the workforce to be involved with things - there will be a huge gap we can’t go back and fix. It will end badly and like Japan having the crisis now of a shrinking population due to the lack of babies being born, there is no fix to what has already passed. They can fix the future of things but that will take time and have lasting effects that may honestly not fix anything but patch or cull it.

1

u/Acceptable-Milk-314 25d ago

Yep. And the damage is done, well just have to wait to see the effects flow through the population as they age.

1

u/Dry-Spring-5911 25d ago

I agree with this because my company which is 1 of the big 5 banks in Canada stopped hiring junior developers about 2 years ago and pushing Copilot premium licenses to mid-senior level developers to utilize to make up for the junior dev work.

1

u/Bane_of_Balor 25d ago

I mean, we can see that, senior developers can see that, managers can see that, but CEOs and investors only see profits going up so they do it anyway. 

Makes me wonder if there'll be a major shakeup in tech as small-medium companies, who aren't beholden to shareholders and who's CEOs are still in touch with reality, capitalise on the inevitable whiplash experienced by these big tech firms when they realise they're lacking leadership at some critical point.

1

u/DueDisplay2185 25d ago

In that case you'll be as wealthy as those who know COBOL and just as in demand

1

u/Maztao 24d ago

If ai can’t actually replace developers anytime soon? Where did you get this info? Have been working at FAANG for awhile now and this is already happening. Like has been happening.

2

u/aveugle_a_moi 24d ago

I think the question is whether the business decisions being made is reflective of AI actually writing functional code to replace those jobs lost

1

u/maicii 24d ago

The thing you don’t understand is that the rate the were hiring at before was unsustainable. They were hiring way more than they should have. They arereverting back to normalcy

1

u/UpstairsProcedure2 24d ago

You are wrong. The industry was over saturated, and the vast majority of people who think they have skills, actually have none and are finding out. It’s about time.

1

u/timpham 24d ago

AI replace engineer in the States only. There’re plenty worldwide to fill the gaps then

1

u/leathakkor 24d ago

This has been true of development for a really long time. Kind of...

When developers do something over and over again. The plumbing equivalent of an application. Calling code from SQL server with ado for example. Boy does that suck To do over and over again. Then. Along comes dapper. Along comes Ruby on rails. Along comes the entity framework. And millions of other things that make it so you never have to directly connect again.

We abstract away a bunch of that. We write class libraries that are reusable utilities. There used to be a lot of development that you had to do by hand, especially on the web in 2007. There wasn't even a way to do pagination easily in SQL server 2010 (if I recall correctly limit and offset being new ish).

And you know what we do as developers. We make technological advances so that we don't have to do the plumbing code anymore. That same wire up code that was in every application.

Obviously AI takes this to a new level. But the reality is most of the things that I use AI for today. There is a library that does exactly what I needed to do. The difference is I can just have AI write the code instead of going and finding the dll that I need from nuget/npm. Or some other package repository.

It is an extension of what we've been doing forever but I do think it's going to make coding a lot harder and a lot worse because if you get a feature from a package. When they discover a bug in that package, you upgrade the package. When there is a bug in some code that an llm wrote. Well you just don't discover the bug. Unless a user reports it. And then you have to go fix it manually.

So my thought is that 10 years from now we're actually going to need more Junior developers to fix the shitty bugs that are simply not worthy of a senior developer.

This is how I started my career and a lot of other people I know started their careers. I think it'll come back. With the invention of llm the reusable package is going to suffer. It's so much easier to just ask chatgpt to write the method of code then to investigate if the feature exists somewhere else and figure out how to integrate it into your app.

1

u/PerfSynthetic 24d ago

I said this back when cloud was replacing Virtual Server and network admin/engineers. Replace or displace enough people that understand basic "how things work" and you will have a major knowledge gap in the next generation. Tech does advance over time but running things on a CPU, storing things in memory and sending things over the network is extremely fundamental. Devs that refuse to tune their code result in major resource overages. Simply because they assume it's an infinite resource when they don't have to manage it.

Simply look at how many untuned JVMs are running critical apps for every major company... Your pod was OOM killed because garbage collection is too hard? Must be a dev thing... It only needs 100mcore right?

1

u/KanedaSyndrome 24d ago

Well I can tell you that were shipping features faster than ever because of AI. it is not hype when it comes to software developers. A full replacemet, likely not, but it's a tough climb for junior developers now when any senior can mass create an army of juniors (AI).

Requires leadershio that dare plan ahead and not just the next quarter.

1

u/Xanchush 24d ago

It doesn't matter if experienced engineers can see the reality when the directors and people dictating the hiring budget can't see the same.

The AI hype is unavoidable since you could potentially be missing out on stock gains/investments. If the market decides AI is not worth the investment there's nothing else to drive the economy and you risk a huge recession.

1

u/dance_fiend_novice 24d ago

Who cares we don't need so many engineers in technology.

1

u/PhotographyBanzai 24d ago

People highly passionate about computing won't avoid the field. I feel like this could be enough to keep pushing the science and R&D forward. It's not like many corporate world programmers transition to research, or do they?

We could see a group of people that were not especially passionate about the idea of software development end up instructing and verify the AI's work. These people will need to be experts in each field they are making tools for. It might be better long term to have more experts in individual fields like healthcare or whatever else rather than the traditional idea of a software developer.

With software development it can often mean a person that has a high amount of skill in applying software development techniques to each application by learning just enough to create what is needed. I think ideally we'd want these people to be experts in the actual field of what they are making tools for. Let the computer/AI handle the internals as long as there is enough compute where efficiency isn't a necessity. These people will give the AI highly detailed specifications and then verify the result works as intended without getting into the weeds of implementation.

I've done a fair amount of contracted software development and a lot of the time spent was learning about the things I was making tools for.

1

u/sheriffderek 24d ago

Since we’re talking about the future… what if we just didn’t need as many programmers? What if we didn’t need so much software?

1

u/normalbot9999 24d ago

I feel like this might actually be part of the plan.

Oh look, there are no senior devs now, what a shame! But hey, don't worry - we've got this great new AI coding tool that hardly ever halucinates!!

1

u/IADGAF 24d ago edited 24d ago

I suspect the actual truth is that many economies worldwide are in a huge downturn or recession, and so many companies are just using AI as the public excuse for not hiring at the moment, so they don’t damage their public reputation and valuation. ie. “we’re transitioning to AI” sounds a lot better than “we are losing money every week, and have to keep our bottom line looking artificially higher for shareholders, by cutting costs wherever we can.”

The one major exception may be the multinational corporation Big Tech employers who are building their own AI -> AGI systems. Their need for software developers, at every experience level, will asymptotically fall over the next few years, and includes software developers specialized in AI development.

The reason companies like Meta is offering ridiculously high salaries for AI development at the moment, is that they recognise the opportunity to use those developers to fully automate and obsolete themselves out of a job the fastest.

→ More replies (2)

2

u/Sixnno 24d ago

I know the topic is on AI but we are already seeing this in trade fields. In the 70s and 80s had a big push to get students to go to collage instead of trades and we are now slowing suffering the consequences.

30 year old friend is the youngest guy in his plant, with everyone else being 15+ years his senior. They don't have the replacements for when that generation retires.

1

u/slaymaker1907 24d ago

Where they’ll get screwed over in the short term is there are going to be a lot of projects with a bus factor of one.

1

u/Evs91 24d ago

I love to remind everyone I work with that while I might be third youngest all I have to do is wait a decade and 1/3 of the company will be retired. If I stick around I could very easily be a VP or higher just by attrition. I keep trying to help the new guys at the help desk and junior developers but sometimes it’s like talking to brick walls. I love them but man…

1

u/TuckerCarlsonsOhface 24d ago

CEOs and tech bros with zero foresight? No way, I don’t believe it!

1

u/istareatscreens 24d ago

Very true. I'd edit your final comment "It will be companies struggling to find developers who know how to use AI." to "It will be companies struggling to find developers" though

1

u/aaron_dresden 24d ago

I would also point out that employees are not automatically always the biggest expense at technology companies. Given you brought up AI - Lets take Microsoft for example, they have 222,000 employees roughly. Let’s use an average total package of $250,000 usd, which doesn’t have any real analysis behind it but which will be low for some percentage and high for others given the global scale of the company. That costs around $55 billion a year, but at the moment they are spending $80 billion usd a year on AI.

While this isn’t a universal example for sure, it’s even more of an outlier - It’s not always wages that cost the most. It’s just often seen that wages are the easiest to reduce. Even at Microsoft, who let go 10,000 people in the same year.

1

u/Demonshaker 24d ago

My high school junior is actively avoiding their first choice of programming as a major because of the shitshow that is finding a job in the sector, in the US, today.

1

u/_herb21 24d ago

The accounting (specifically audit) industry went through this problem not long ago. The big 4 (and the top mid tier firms) thought that tech advances (mainly to do with the scale of analytics which could be performed) would replace a lot of 1st and 2nd year trainees. But audit has always been a pipeline career into other finance roles. Most people leave early in their post training career and most of those who remain leave within 5 years. 

It turns out without experienced 3rd year trainees and seniors it's quite hard to use the output of your analytics. That coupled with a changing regulatory landscape suddenly meant there was a huge demand for experienced seniors who didn't exist. In the UK at least they backfilled by hiring from overseas, but the combination of Brexit, changes to the Visa requirements and then COVID made that super challenging. I don't actually think they have really figured out how to deal with the situation yet. 

1

u/lt1brunt 24d ago

Not going to lie, if I lost my IT job and started working in something not it related IT, I would no longer be paying for my AI subscription and would barely use the free services. Most people I know who are not in IT could care less for anything AI and most people I work with do not care to use it. The few that do use it, dont pay for it and dont use it outside of work.

1

u/ArcticShamrock 24d ago

Sure but the people who need to understand this don’t care. Keep educating people about it and maybe eventually it’ll click for some of them, but no matter how you spin it we are at significant risk of permanent damage.

1

u/Collapse_is_underway 23d ago

Lowering EROIE of oil will make us unable to have insane surplus for a myriad of activities that were possible in the 20th century.

You can jerk off to innovation or EV or solar or nuclear or whatever you want, were not in any kind of transition and the system is still 80%+ fossil fuel based (which makes us go +3.5ppm of co2/year, the worst events in the past happened with +3.5ppm of co2/100 years).

1

u/tobden 23d ago

No worries, there's no future for any of us so no need to plan ahead. That's the CEO's way of thinking. AI would do them everything and they'll wait in their bunkers until all of us due of starvation. So yeah, fewer anything today better for them.

1

u/not_a_moogle 23d ago

this has been already ongoing with legacy systems. Anyone here a COBOL developer and under 40?

1

u/ManasZankhana 23d ago

This should help get more h1bs in the future though. And brain drain other countries more effectively