Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin
Ask HN: Those still optimistic about a career in software – why?
4 points by cipherdc 15 days ago | hide | past | favorite | 10 comments
We keep hearing that the latest LLMs are approaching AGI. The people who run the frontier labs are warning or hinting that soon all code will be written by models. Some argue that software engineering is about much more than just coding, but you don't need nearly as many people for those other parts either.

So what happens to people who spent decades in school and on the job, who are passionate about coding and get their energy from writing code?

I don't believe in universal basic (or high) income, because that's not how the world has worked so far. I've never seen a world where all humans have equal capabilities or resources — physical strength, financial strength, anything. If everyone gets paid the same, I don't see where the motivation to work comes from. And without work, I think people's cognitive skills will decline and we'll end up completely dependent on the machines slaves to the tech.

Thinking about all this has left me feeling pretty low. For those of you in tech who still feel positive about waking up every day: what keeps you motivated?



> what keeps you motivated?

Learning new things. Discovering more things about myself. Deepening relationships with other people. Much joy to experience.


> We keep hearing that the latest LLMs are approaching AGI.

A gentle reminder if you keep hearing this, it means AGI hasn't happened and so the accusations that "approaching AGI" become more like "fusion in 50 years" than not bear fruit.

There is no inductive reasoning behind "approaching AGI" simply more agglutinative outcomes, which invite the statement.


Back when I did Psychology 101, there were many papers attacking IQ tests on the basis that it depended on which form of intelligence you were testing for. Philosophers cannot agree on how to define intelligence.

On that basis we can accept that "AI" can be good at some forms of intelligence and not so good on others. A human brain needs about 200W of power. AI data centers need a 100 million times that ... each. So next times your lights dim, just think that somewhere an AI is "thinking".


It sounds like you're upset and fearful about having your hand forced and joining the great unwashed who don't deserve basic or high incomes like you've grown accustomed to and are at risk of losing, along with all the other niceties that now-precariously insulate you from the "real", uglier world you feel is appropriate for the lesser talented unlike yourself

Like you said, you dont believe in basic or high incomes for the lesser, so when you de facto transition over to that demographic, all you have to do is work hard at less paid, more available employment and that will preserve your motivation. Bills add up and savings erode quickly, what more or better motivation could one ask for?


I enjoy automating other people's livelihoods. I also enjoy figuring out clever ways to skirt around legislation, it's a fun exercise. As a hobby, I like to find new ways to collect more data to make surveillance more convenient.


It’s all just cognitive dissonance. Anyone claiming optimism around salaries is just flat wrong. I see non-engineers contributing to production code and it’s simply a matter of time until leadership feels comfortable with downsizing and or lowering salaries.


The money is still good compared to breaking rocks.


"writing code" is a tiny part of what "a career in software" means. You haven't begun to understand the complexity of systems if you think the code part is the dominant part of this career space.

coding is thinking. coding is systematising. coding is reasoning. coding is optimising over generic or less optimal solutions. coding is understanding the complexities behind problems. coding is problem solving.

you think the "approaching AGI" is going to magically replace all the myriad ways this manifests in one go?


I agree most of what you said. But I see reasoning from the models. If we give enough context about different systems, I see latest model can able to thinking provide complex solutions.


> If we give

Therein lies your answer.

You have to give things for the model to do something. You have to give the relevant and appropriate things for the model to do the right thing.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: