People who are saying they're not seeing productivity boost, can you please share where is it failing?
I'm going to guess that many people on HN are also on the "free ChatGPT isn't that good at programming" train.
Probably that's the reason why some people are sure their job is still safe.
Nature of job is changing rapidly
I'm not a tech CEO but people who are anti-LLM for programming have no place on my team.
FWIW I find it useful if I know exactly what I want and it's quicker to prompt it than type it myself. Also for research and building understanding it's generally good. I still catch it being wrong on details of you're really paying attention or literally contradicting itself between prompts. That gives me a lot of pause about trusting things it told me that I just accepted as fact without having enough knowledge myself to question it.
I’m reminded of https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2000/08/09/the-joel-test-12-s...
How much bloat and bureaucracy bottleneck is sitting in middle management whose favorite past time is wasting everyone's time on meetings that could have been an email? HR? Not the execs, but the HR drones that do nothing but answer employee questions about policy, could have already been replaced with not even an AI, just an old school chatbot, a long time ago.
Instead of cutting engineers, cut the non-tech jobs, flatten the structure.
There’s obviously a benefit of paying higher rates for US programmers, but does that benefit change when llms are thrown into the mix
It takes more planning, more specification, more coordination, more QA. The quality is almost always worse, and remediation takes forever. So your BA, QA and PM time goes way up and absorbs any cost savings.
YMMV.
Someone deciding to drop a spreadsheet of customer data into their personal AI account to increase their productivity would be catastrophic for business, so you need rules. And rules means paying for enterprise AI tooling.
The $20 a month tier in particular is a trivial expense, on par with businesses that expect their workers to wear steel toed shoes. Some may give workers a little stipend to buy those boots, some not. Either way, it doesn't really matter.
I don't do tech outside of 9-5, so either my employer pays for it all, or I don't use it. Simple as that. Thankfully, they do pay for it, but I couldn't imagine working somewhere that says "You need to use AI" and then not providing it on their dime.
Quite frankly it should be regulation that if a W2 employee needs something to perform their job duties, the employer must provide it.
Til then wtf_are_these_abstractions.jpg
I worry that we're returning to an era of renting core development tools. After the huge benefits from free and open source tools, that's a bitter pill to swallow.