> It's incredibly far away from doing any significant change in a mature codebase.
I agree with this completely. However the problem that I think the article gets at is still real because junior engineers also can't do significant changes on a mature codebase when they first start out. They used to do the 'easy stuff' which freed the rest of us up to do bigger stuff. But:
1. Companies like mine don't hire juniors anymore
2. With Copilot I can be so much more productive that I don't need juniors to do "the easy stuff" because Copilot can easily do that in 1/1000th the time a junior would.
3. So now who is going to train those juniors to get to the level where we need them to be to make those "significant changes"?
> So now who is going to train those juniors to get to the level where we need them to be to make those "significant changes"?
Founders will cash out long before that becomes an issue. Alternatively, the hype is true and they will obsolete programmers, also solving the issue above…
This is quite devious if you think about it, withering pipeline of new devs and only them having an immediate fix in all cases.
I agree with this completely. However the problem that I think the article gets at is still real because junior engineers also can't do significant changes on a mature codebase when they first start out. They used to do the 'easy stuff' which freed the rest of us up to do bigger stuff. But:
1. Companies like mine don't hire juniors anymore
2. With Copilot I can be so much more productive that I don't need juniors to do "the easy stuff" because Copilot can easily do that in 1/1000th the time a junior would.
3. So now who is going to train those juniors to get to the level where we need them to be to make those "significant changes"?