The article says nothing about genai and uses a paywalled article as its source. A second source is an article written by the author.
Not sure what barrow this is peddling, other than repeating the absurd notion that software engineers are paid too much whilst the Australian Computer Society promotes articles stating that they should be paid at 1995 pay rates.
As an ICT professional with over 40 years experience, all I see is poorly informed HR teams hiring the very cheapest graduates they can find and believing that Assumed Intelligence will make it all better after they decimated their experienced staff.
No wonder we have escalating data breaches and security nightmares, not to mention unstable consumer electronics and a growing list of terrifying trends in vehicle software implementations with absolutely no global mechanisms for regulation or certification.
Edit: spelling
resipsaloquitur@lemmy.world
on 27 Mar 14:40
nextcollapse
Ditto.
The entire concept behind genAI coding is you can pay a recent grad peanuts to babysit (read: be liable for the mistakes of) a computer to program itself.
I don’t understand the articles breathlessly saying that there’s skyrocketing demand for senior engineers and plummeting demand for juniors. What is the expertise for if AI is so smart?
Or are we finally saying the quiet part out loud — that genAI is making subtle mistakes that take experience to spot?
The article says nothing about genai and uses a paywalled article as its source. A second source is an article written by the author.
Not sure what barrow this is peddling, other than repeating the absurd notion that software engineers are paid too much whilst the Australian Computer Society promotes articles stating that they should be paid at 1995 pay rates.
Are you disagreeing
As an ICT professional with over 40 years experience, all I see is poorly informed HR teams hiring the very cheapest graduates they can find and believing that Assumed Intelligence will make it all better after they decimated their experienced staff.
No wonder we have escalating data breaches and security nightmares, not to mention unstable consumer electronics and a growing list of terrifying trends in vehicle software implementations with absolutely no global mechanisms for regulation or certification
or agreeing with the author?
I’m not sure if my reading comprehension is what it used to be, but the author of the article seemed to share similar concerns with you.
threaded - newest
The article says nothing about genai and uses a paywalled article as its source. A second source is an article written by the author.
Not sure what barrow this is peddling, other than repeating the absurd notion that software engineers are paid too much whilst the Australian Computer Society promotes articles stating that they should be paid at 1995 pay rates.
As an ICT professional with over 40 years experience, all I see is poorly informed HR teams hiring the very cheapest graduates they can find and believing that Assumed Intelligence will make it all better after they decimated their experienced staff.
No wonder we have escalating data breaches and security nightmares, not to mention unstable consumer electronics and a growing list of terrifying trends in vehicle software implementations with absolutely no global mechanisms for regulation or certification.
Edit: spelling
Ditto.
The entire concept behind genAI coding is you can pay a recent grad peanuts to babysit (read: be liable for the mistakes of) a computer to program itself.
I don’t understand the articles breathlessly saying that there’s skyrocketing demand for senior engineers and plummeting demand for juniors. What is the expertise for if AI is so smart?
Or are we finally saying the quiet part out loud — that genAI is making subtle mistakes that take experience to spot?
Are you disagreeing
or agreeing with the author?
I’m not sure if my reading comprehension is what it used to be, but the author of the article seemed to share similar concerns with you.