idk how common this is in the industry though, but since the introduction of AI my role has expanded so much beyond what is just writing code, i'm now a devops/product/dev person and expected to do all of that at once for the same pay as before
i actually enjoy it myself cause you feel less like a ticket pusher
As long as humans are making decisions, human interaction remains important. From this perspective, PMs are still in a better position than engineers
Don’t worry, human interaction is very complicated. Thankfully there are no llm models/google/xai with technology to do exactly that. Your pearls are safe.
Gen AI has changed every single part of classic software development, and the impact hasn't even remotely been felt. And zero jobs are "safe" in that traditional way that we saw them.
It's actually staggering to think of how the teams I've led developed software five years ago, ten years ago, fifteen years ago and twenty years ago. Easily 95% of that effort has been obliterated (I'm estimating on the low side, more like 99.5%). Classic wisdom like "the specification needs to be 100% up front because once we implement it stratifies" are relics of the past.
Everything has changed. I can't fully express how software development will work, but it certainly won't involve someone whose job is "human interaction".
Neither of these statements are true if your team is building anything remotely complex with real customers. You can’t quickly verify if your decisions will survive the test of time and past mistakes can’t always be easily fixed. LLMs trivialize the easy parts of software development and enable faster enshittification of the projects they’re used on, but that’s about it.
> On the other hand nobody is going to try building a building only to check if it's structurally sound because that would be absurd.
Structural engineering isn't some mystical science. It's a set of mathematical truths, calculations, SOPs, and so on. If a human can do it, of course a machine can do it, and I'm obviously not saying "run it through the stochastic parrot and out comes a corporate headquarter building", but it's a part of the process where we're rapidly going to get there. And of course, the disruption in that field is already underway. For instance Stru AI. Yes, an engineer is still involved, but the premise is that your single engineer now replaces 10 engineers, and so on.
Gen AI isn't going to be plunging toilets or changing bedpans...yet...but it disrupts almost every role in the "white collar" world. That doesn't mean it eliminates every job, but it completely upends the norms.
For security or applying business logic (and how it interfaces with programming or database logic), you get less and less assurance by just looking at it.
Citation needed. Many of my users don't even know what correct would be.
> nobody is going to try building a building only to check if it's structurally sound because that would be absurd.
Well, that otoh can be simulated quite easily.
What should we call these intermediate deterministic artifacts? Code!
Yeah we'll still need to know a sequence to flip bits in the right order, but it isn't code you'll recognize.
Don't get me wrong. There absolutely is survival bias at play here. Historically speaking, most devs change careers long before they turn senior.
I'm just not understanding the hysteria. This is the latest set of reasons for people to quit. Before AI, it was outsourcing. If you want to, just quit already. If you want to stay, deal with it.
I think you can eventually set up an AI system that handles a lot of the interactions and conversations people have.
For the rest of us, that's not a problem.
> I grew up with the distinction of "tech guy" needs a "product guy". I am not dismissing it, I am just saying that the world is entering into a phase where both roles are eventually melting into a single function.
The whole reason why Engineering exists in organizations is to take Product's ideas and turn them into reality. When Product can realize its own ideas (through AI) then Engineering is no longer necessary as a political sub-organization. Making it happen requires engineers to learn Product skills and adopt a "Product" job title. We will likely call people with both skillsets Product Engineers. People who can't adapt to learning both skillsets are at risk of losing their jobs.
Ai makes it a lot more urgent but pm folks who dropped features from on high never worked as well as pms down in the weeds with engineering in the first place, nor did engineers who didn't want to get out there with customers and understand the why deeply.
I do not believe in PM making good engineering solutions, even with AI. Similarly to engineers, not interested in product, products have no interest in engineering. However you still need someone responsible for the decisions.
One possible future I’m considering is humanity converging to a “unit of responsibility” - in order to run a company with a certain scale you’ll need to have N humans responsible for different parts of the business.
That is such bs. I’ve known just as many pms incapable of human connection. And scrummasters. And project managers. And every other “needs empathy” job.
Stop spreading this bias nonesense.