rzza

Why you don't believe we'll get to state of AI being the predominant creator of complex and usable software? It seems like you're more focused on the fact that it can't handle the most complex use cases today.

Into LLM code generation

We're only 1 year into this

> otherwise the autonomous car software would be part of it

I think it's too extreme a definition. It's not like we need to wait to get to that level to seriously consider the effects when 90% of software is not that. It feels more relevant to consider where the domain of things it can accomplish is equal to 90% of software creation.

> if you know what you are doing, are you really faster prompting the AI to generate code for you than writing the code directly? I would argue that for something completely trivial, I can completely imagine that I have written the code in vim before the IDE integrating the AI has even loaded.

This would indicate me you're far higher than the median software engineer -- you're maybe top 0.1%

> when you have a bug in the codebase, does the AI find it for you? Because if you have to debug it yourself, it may not be fun to have to dig into AI-generated code.

AI is probably better at debugging than most software engineers. If your point is that it's worse than the top 0.1% of debuggers, then I'd agree but I'd argue it should get better over time. The question of if there's physical or theoretical limitations on it getting better is an interesting one. There's still a massive amount of code to train on.

> Sure, and with AI they will be replaced by the same amount of startups building a CRM with AI.

Yes, perhaps this implies value must accrue to something that's not the CRM and more how the AI plays into it.

I agree in the current state but think that's too focused on the outcomes right now. It seems more likely that a bunch of companies would perfect all those kinks because there's enough economic incentive to do so.

It's similar to any disruptive technology at the beginning of an S-curve if you've read Innovator's Dilemma. At first, it just handles small niche use cases and the incumbent (software engineers) move upmarket to customers with higher demands that the disruptive technology can't satisfy (maybe the Autonomous driving software) but then the disruptive technology gets good enough as companies pour resources into developing it until it can satisfy even the higher demand customers.

--Agree on potential of bubble --On the second point, Autonomous car software is already an extreme example (maybe not, I've never written it). Most vertical SaaS apps are dashboards with front-end, back-end, and a database. It seems pretty groundbreaking if we even reach a point where all those can be built in less than an hour. Think about how many startups are just basically building a CRM right now.