14 comments

[ 3.4 ms ] story [ 21.2 ms ] thread
Why does this article read like it's AI-generated?
The answer to your question is very simple.
Why is that important? If the point is well made, if the content is interesting, why should I care whether a human or an LLM wrote it?

Most of us don't seem to care anymore if the _code_ is written by AI, so why should we care if other _content_ is written by AI?

To restate what I put elsewhere, I genuinely don't think I care much for how it was written. The problem is that it felt exhausting to read and was chock full of the same claudese voice that makes claude so infuriatingly exhausting to read. I gave it a try and gave up halfway through. If it was AI generated but was a good read that conveyed a central point/theme, I wouldn't be complaining. This at least is trying to argue a single point, but it does so in what feels like at least 10x the word count.
Here's the honest truth: it's AI-generated.

80% of this is AI-prose-tropes. The tropes are load bearing.

(Any other ai-isms I can blast in? Probably)

So let's think one more step out. You're supposed to train your juniors so that you have seniors when everyone else is scrambling. But when everyone is scrambling, the biggest and most-funded/most-profitable companies will be offering a lot more money than you can afford to pay your now-senior devs. Now I suppose you think those former juniors would be so grateful that you trained them, that they would be loyal to your company and continue working for what you're paying them, right? ...right?
> Now I suppose you think those former juniors would be so grateful that you trained them, that they would be loyal to your company ...

For a while, yes. Which is why you should do this. And you could always pay them more to keep them.

"Awhile" IME is 3-6 months. And they won't stay for 10% more when Meta offers them 50% more. It's brutal but I'm not sure the economics of 'training' add up for any individual company.
What was the classic joke on this one?

"What happens if we train these people and they leave?" "What happens if you don't and they stay"

I think these thoughts on what happens without the junior-to-senior pipeline have been circulating for a while, long before the conversation even shifted to agents.

What it boils down to is AI staying just bad enough to always need a developer to make the important calls. Meanwhile every effort is being made to improve it. If there's a ceiling that preserves our jobs and the value we bring to companies it will be a bitter pill to swallow for everyone else.

> Every company on earth is about to want one who can drive a fleet of agents with judgment

Maybe seniors are seniors because they care about their work so they won't be using AI crap for serious projects

And maybe the reason there will be a senior shortage is because we all got pissed off and left.
Yeah, the "but this can be done in a day with AI" from management is going to get old soon
Your French is showing; isolable s.b. isolatable.