Hacker News Reader

Comment by onion2k | Hacker News Reader

I think my job is reasonably safe simply because "AI" is never going to be as effective at it as "me + AI". Someone has to be there to understand the problem in human terms in order to know what to tell the AI to do. I've recently started pushing myself to take a more Systems Thinking approach to solving problems, and to start using AI in my work, precisely because I see this as a change that's coming. It is inevitable. I might as well embrace it.

Also, and maybe this is selfish, I suspect fewer people are going to see tech as a good career option in the very long term (10+ years). The experience I have now puts me ahead right now, but if there are fewer devs entering the industry in a decade it'll keep me in work for a long time. I'm think (hope!) I'm going to be OK.

If I was a junior right now, or a student, I would see AI as a much greater threat.

View on HN

As AI grows stronger, the "me" part is going to matter less and less.

A "graduate + AI" might be nearly as effective as "you + AI", while being significantly more... cost-efficient.

and eventually it would just be "business owner"+ai. The way i see it is that a small business owner would use the AI by directly talking to it, via natural language, and continuously iterate on the output.

The feedback loop would be fast, because the AI is almost instantly able to produce an observable outcome/product, even if it's wrong. Then the owner tests it out, or ask the AI to test it etc, and whenever the owner finds any deficiency, they can easily ask for a change.

There's also a chance that if the AI component is handling language and any localised customs, the strategy part from "you" moves offshore.

> "AI" is never going to be as effective at it as "me + AI"

Yeah, but which one will be cheaper?

My hope (as a mid 30s developer) is that I can effectively use AI to become a Me+ version of myself, and this helps me level up my career enough that I appropriately ride the AI wave, pick the right engineering positions/companies, and am able to effectively retire in ~5-10 years.

I really do feel that I have like 5 years left of my currently high income before I am making what my plumber friend makes. I'm OK with that, as I'll be out of the early child rearing years, but also, phew, it's scary!

Warning: speculation incoming.

Yeah that's me. I'm hoping that if I keep up to speed as much as possible I'm employable for the next 20-30 years until (early) retirement.

I started transitioning away from programming before that (for unrelated reasons) but I'm starting to think that it was a good call. If I am to become the COBOL guy of the future I'd consider that a win.

We'll see I guess.

"AI" is never going to be as effective at it as "me + AI".

That's what people said about chess ai.

Not comparable - that's a very limited slice of AI we're talking about.

Yes, a very limited AI still devalued all that a human brought to the table.

Now AI models are getting both more general, and deepening their comprehension, at the same time. Rapidly.

If there are highly talented humans in your field today who would find your extra help more of a distraction than a help, then it’s likely more advanced models will to.

Not being critical. This applies to me too. All of us!

Chess is not a team sport.

Has Magnus or a similarly good player ever played against an AI using an AI to assist him? That sounds like it could be interesting.

This is called centaur chess.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advanced_chess

As I understand it, chess ai just does better without dumb humans to overrule it these days.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carlsen%E2%80%93Niemann_contro...

This is not exactly what you asked, but it shows that high-level players are using AI to play better chess.

Hmm, there would be no point at this stage as there are no positions AI is not certain to have found at least as good a move as a human.

Eventually the ‘me’ part hits diminishing marginal returns if AI is capable of getting you 90% of the way. As good as you + AI? Maybe not. Good enough? Probably.

I think the better question to ask in the here and now is - is 1 developer + AI as effective as 2 developers without? What about 3, 5, etc?

"never" is a long time.

well if they pay you for you and suddenly you are only 50% of the equation guess what will be your shareholder next move

Or if "you + AI" can do the job of two or three staff...

Reply on news.ycombinator.com