ResearchCode

I suspect you're right. Part of the supervised "learning" is hard-coding answers to gotchas posted on Twitter.

I didn't get five times as productive yet. It's something closer to a few percent or less, which makes LLMs about as useful as syntax highlighting. It's nice to have, but not essential.

We will see in a few years.

Wouldn't they be on O-1 visas. Still, I get your point.

The best people have job mobility, and some or many of them like to work from home.

You can and probably should negotiate that clause away. If an employer offers you an at-will contract, it should have a US salary written on it or at least a large sign-on bonus.

Software is not reliable in the same sense that mathematics delivery is not reliable. If you're doing something routine and reliable you should be automating it.

But a weekly 1-1 would be excessive regardless

The good jobs tend to not have a "product owner".

They're language models. They don't seem less capable of replacing a manager than a software engineer. Language models can make a powerpoint and fill in an Excel spreadsheet. They can sit in on a meeting that could have been an e-mail. Hiring is a game of craps, but a language model could try to evaluate resumes for you.

Get a better job that doesn't have "product managers", "agile coaches" or "solution architects". Those are bad places for engineers.

What would it cost? I would take a $10k hit on a $300k wage to get a real office. Seems like a no-brainer.

Large language models seem more useful for cutting down the number of "VP"s

It looks like it will be able to do every non-programming office job first.

Is it still worth learning anything other than computer science?

Bootstrapped startups? Not so many agile coaches in them

We should call them todo lists again, to do away with the problematic capital-a agile association.

In an efficient economy, language models would definitely replace the bullshitters first.

It's like the management consulting scam but with absolutely none of the prestige.

No, they are a joke and actively harmful. Shows how little some organizations respect software engineers. There's no 2-day course you can take and get a job micro-managing doctors, lawyers or finance workers.

Shouldn't non-programming office workers be more concerned is what I'm thinking.

That's in the US. Old money in Europe is older than US as a country.

It has but not helped me work.

Still waiting on those autonomous cars.

Unlike many other software development tools, I've found ChatGPT to be useless so far.

Those must be some big gotchas, because self-driving cars have not replaced a job here, yet.

Large language models show more promise for replacing non-programming office workers.

Large language models are very intriguing as a technology to replace business people. Make a few PowerPoint slides, fill in an excel sheet. Generate a summary for a pointless meeting.

Still waiting for those autonomous cars.

What replacement? When "AI" can code decently, it will already have replaced Excel and Powerpoint workers, and middle managers sitting in pointless meetings.

Can the "product owner" actually program? Otherwise it won't work.

That's called code review, you don't need any "agile" for it. Agile is used to micromanage engineers to push out crap features, optimizing for the two week return, with poor results in the longer term. The people running amok are layman "agile coaches", "business analysts" and "product owners". While poor engineers are prevented from doing necessary non-feature work.

Substantial software engineering jobs tend not to do "sprints" and no or limited "agile". You still want to always be learning.