I'm putting some water in my wine and starting to use LLMs more and more to help me when I have questions, but I'm still sceptical to be honest.
As the saying goes, ‘practice makes perfect’. I find it hard to believe that the new generation of developers addicted to LLMs still have the ability to think like us, who weren't born into this …
I'm putting some water in my wine and starting to use LLMs more and more to help me when I have questions, but I'm still sceptical to be honest.
As the saying goes, ‘practice makes perfect’. I find it hard to believe that the new generation of developers addicted to LLMs still have the ability to think like us, who weren't born into this world. They'll be too used to copying and pasting what the LLM says for that. On the other hand, if LLMs become more and more reliable, maybe there won't be any need to really think? Maybe that's the inevitable evolution?
In short, I'm both happy and unhappy with the evolution of LLMs. We'll see what the future brings. :D
If the LLMs become super effectives, then using them will be a form of compilation of thoughts into code, abstracting it away, in the same way memory management is abstracted in Python/Ruby/PHP/JS.
If they don't, eventually new devs will have to learn what's up, but they will be super effective à using LLMs for what they are good for.
Fusion research, the starlink constallation and the LHC show that there are still new engineers that are as smart as 80 years ago before the computer existed.
LLMs may very well dilute the pool of devs by making programming accessible to less technical or experienced people so that it feels your colleagues are not as good as before. But I'm betting the absolute number of smart people becoming programmers will actually increase.
"If the LLMs become super effectives, then using them will be a form of compilation of thoughts into code, abstracting it away, in the same way memory management is abstracted in Python/Ruby/PHP/JS." ==> I sincerely hope it happens when I'm close to retirement. 😆
"But I'm betting the absolute number of smart people becoming programmers will actually increase." ==> I have major doubts on this point, but time will tell.
I'm putting some water in my wine and starting to use LLMs more and more to help me when I have questions, but I'm still sceptical to be honest.
As the saying goes, ‘practice makes perfect’. I find it hard to believe that the new generation of developers addicted to LLMs still have the ability to think like us, who weren't born into this world. They'll be too used to copying and pasting what the LLM says for that. On the other hand, if LLMs become more and more reliable, maybe there won't be any need to really think? Maybe that's the inevitable evolution?
In short, I'm both happy and unhappy with the evolution of LLMs. We'll see what the future brings. :D
If the LLMs become super effectives, then using them will be a form of compilation of thoughts into code, abstracting it away, in the same way memory management is abstracted in Python/Ruby/PHP/JS.
If they don't, eventually new devs will have to learn what's up, but they will be super effective à using LLMs for what they are good for.
Fusion research, the starlink constallation and the LHC show that there are still new engineers that are as smart as 80 years ago before the computer existed.
LLMs may very well dilute the pool of devs by making programming accessible to less technical or experienced people so that it feels your colleagues are not as good as before. But I'm betting the absolute number of smart people becoming programmers will actually increase.
"If the LLMs become super effectives, then using them will be a form of compilation of thoughts into code, abstracting it away, in the same way memory management is abstracted in Python/Ruby/PHP/JS." ==> I sincerely hope it happens when I'm close to retirement. 😆
"But I'm betting the absolute number of smart people becoming programmers will actually increase." ==> I have major doubts on this point, but time will tell.