Assemblers, Linkers, Compilers, Copying, Macros, Makefiles, Code gen, Templates, CI & CD, Editors, Auto-complete, IDEs are all terms that describe types of automation in software development.
LLM-generated code is another form of automation, but it certainly isn't the first. Right now most of the problems are when it is inappropriately used. The same applies to other forms of automation too - but LLMs are really hyped up right now. Probably it will go through the normal hype cycle where there'll be a crash, and then a plateau where LLMs are used to drive productivity but expectations of their capability are more aligned to reality.
The whole field is about automating yourself out of a job, and it's right in the name.
https://grodiko.fr/informatique?lang=en
German site claims that "Informatik", which is practically the same, is a contraction of "Information" and "Mathematik":
https://www.pctipp.ch/praxis/gewusst/kam-begriff-informatik-...
https://www.larousse.fr/dictionnaires/francais/informatique/...
This cites the same person (Philippe Dreyfus) but with "automatic":
https://www.caminteresse.fr/societe/quelle-est-lorigine-du-m...
> Il faut attendre 1962 pour réentendre parler d’informatique dans les médias. « Informatique » est en effet le terme utilisé pour la première fois par un scientifique français pour désigner le traitement automatique des données. Il s’agit de Philippe Dreyfus, fondateur de la société SIA, acronyme pour « Société d’Informatique Appliquée ».
And then enters the dictionary in 1966.
In 1957 in Germany, Karl Steinbuch describes Informatik as Automatische Informationsverarbeitung.
Another option would be to join forces to collectively demand more equitable distribution of the fruits of technological development. Sadly it doesn't seem to be very popular.
Strange enough the people that have the most to gain from keeping things the same, are really successful at convincing the masses who have the most to benefit from change in this regard to vote against it.
https://pjhollis123.medium.com/careful-mate-that-foreigner-w...
The problem I have with unions is that they can be too unreasonable. They're too much on the other side, they're too hardline just like the ultracapitalists/neoliberals but on the other side. In a good system we wouldn't have to fight for our rights because we'd already have them anyway.
You have fallen for capitalist propaganda. Time to re-evaluate.
Note: I'm not living in the US obviously :)
I do say a balance because of course we're not living in a communist state. So even with a socialist government there is still capitalism. Just not unrestrictedly so as it is in the US.
I'm not sure how it works in the US but in our company the union is many bitching about stupid stuff like breastfeeding rooms (when there are no women who bring their babies to work anyway - they just work from home after their 6 months maternity leave). All our basic rights are already sorted. We can't work too many hours, we have unlimited sick leave (though of course validated by a doctor for long absences), we're entitled to a lot of money when fired etc. But this is all national law level stuff. Not industry level.
Having strong and independent unions is how you keep a good socialist government. Almost anytime you hear “With a good government, you don’t need <whatever>”, you are hearing a recipe for guaranteeing that good government is an exceptional, transitory state. If your society isn't prepared for bad government, it will have one sooner than you’d like, and it will be difficult to dislodge it.
A true committed exclusionary socialist.
The bad thing is they converted the welfare room for this which was used all the time :(
I really needed that place because of the move to hotdesking so I'm constantly sitting besides blabby sales people. Formerly we had an IT floor where people knew concentration is sometimes needed. So I'd go there to sit in silence and de-stress for a while.
But I have to say the company is good otherwise, I told them about my difficulty and the H&S people let me work from home much more than others.
I hate the way companies are going back from full remote to hybrid hotdesking though because that is the worst of both worlds.
Nothing about your example is an overreach of unions. In fact, it is a perfect example of the value of organised labour.
In honour of recent comments by dang, I won't be as direct as I'd historically be and instead invite you to think about - in the grand scheme of things - how accessibility, including expressing mothers, may be a societal and absolute good.
As a secondary exercise, maybe it's worth thinking about the ethics of presence sensors.
You claim you’re trying to balance individualism and collectivism but don’t actually support things that make collectivism work so you end up de facto supporting individualism.
Its a way to support individualism while allowing people to feel extra good about themselves for supporting collectivist ideas, on paper.
But where I live we just have strong labour rights from the government so individual unions fighting for each type of labour's rights are not needed as much. Sometimes they are, when there are specific risks like chemicals that they work with. But for overall "not get taken advantage of" stuff, it's just not needed so much.
Is that dramatic? No.
More specifically: Things can be inevitable and also horrible. It is not some kind of cognitive dissonance to care about people losing their livelihoods and also agree that it had to happen. We can structure society to help people, but instead we hate the imaginary stereotypes we've generalized every conceivable grouping of real people into, politics being the most obvious example, but we do it with everything, as you have.
The electrician doesn't "deserve" punishment for "advocating" away the jobs replaced by electricity. The engineer doesn't "deserve" punishment for "advocating" away the jobs replaced by engineering. A person isn't an asshole who deserves his family to suffer because he committed his life to learning to write application servers, or whatever.
It might have been a selling point, but the status quo is that we are inventing new jobs faster than phasing out old ones. The new jobs aren't necessarily more enjoyable, though, and there are no more smoking breaks.
It is not in fact law in the US.
If directors consistently chose "do less with more" - they'd certainly lose under virtually any legal standard?
Edit: I guess it's technically Michigan law, but as far as I'm aware is de facto? Even Aronson v. Lewis wouldn't allow that. (IANAL)
Modern AI encroaches upon what software engineers consider to be interesting work, and also adds more of what they find less enjoyable — using natural language instead of formal language (aka code) for detailed specification — which creates a conflict that didn’t previously exist in software technology.
If you are the person who lost their job, you get all the downside.
Overall, over the whole of the economy, the entire population, and a reasonable period of time, this increasing efficiency is a core driver of the annual overall increase in wealth we know as economic growth.
When an economy is growing, there is in general demand for workers, and so pay and conditions are encouraged; when an economy is shrinking, there is less demand than supply, and pay and conditions are discouraged.
This is only true while wealth inequality is decreasing, which it is not.
If everyone is becoming better off, but at different rates such that there is increase in inequality, then everyone experiences economic growth.
Thought experiment.
We have two people, one with 1000 wealth one with 100.
We have 10% growth per year.
So we see;
1000 -> 1100 -> 1210 -> 1331 100 -> 110 -> 121 -> 133.1
Difference in wealth;
900 -> 990 -> 1089 -> 1198
The ratio of wealth remains 10:1, but the absolute difference becomes larger and larger.
I do not know, and I would like to know, how numbers for wealth inequality are being computed.
FWIW, I spent many years as a cashier. It's not something I find inherently more valuable to the world. If we could trust people not to steal, we wouldn't need them.
Web dev for e-commmerce displaced brick and mortar retail. Web dev for streaming displaced video rentals and audio sales.
Ergo, web devs are directly contributing to the outcomes that e-commerce enables.
If it sounds like I'm including a lot of jobs, it's because every non-service job in the history of the post-industrial revolution economy has revolved around making things more efficient. Software development is not some uniquely evil domain.
Now what needs to be done is to give back the profits to everyone, inclusively, as a kind of "universal basic income", so that we all enjoy it together, and not just the billionaires
It will change the job yes but it also can mean the job can go in new directions because we can do more with less.
This is naive of course. Once you have identified yourself as corporate servants (like for example the CPython developers) the companies will disrespect you and fire you when convenient (as has happened at Google and Microsoft).
It will cause a displacement of job types for sure. But I think it means change more than decline. When industrialisation happened, lots of factory workers were afraid of their jobs and also lost them. But these days nobody even wants to do a menial factory job, slaving away on the production line for minimum wage. In fact most people have a far better life now than the masses did before industrialisation. We also had the computer automation that made entire classes of jobs obsolete. Yet it's almost impossible to find skilled workers in Holland now.
And companies need customers with purchasing power. They can't replace everyone with AI because there will be nobody left with money to sell things to. In the end there will be another balance. The interim time, that's the difficult part. Though it is temporary, it can really hurt specific people.
But I don't see AI as a downward spiral that will never recover. In the end it will enable us to look more towards the future (and I am by no means an "AI bro", I think current capabilities of AI have been ridicuously overhyped)
I think we need to redraw society too to compensate. Things like universal basic income, better welfare etc. Here in Europe we already have that but under the neoliberal regimes of the last 20 years (and the fallout from the American banking crisis), things have been austerised too much.
In America this won't happen as it seems to go only the other way (very hardline capitalism, with a fundamentalist almost taliban-like religious streak) but well, it's what they voted for.
Only a minority of dev jobs are automating people out of work. There are entirely new industries like game dev that can't exist without it.
Software development has gained such a political whipping-boy status, you'd be forgiven for forgetting it's been the route to the middle classes for a lot of people who would otherwise be too common, weird or foreign.
Yes? I know I did, still do, and will continue to at least.
Be kind. Don't be snarky. Converse curiously; don't cross-examine. Edit out swipes.
The electrician is more like the person laying fibre optic cable.