this post was submitted on 26 Sep 2023

-25 points (25.5% liked)

Programming

17530 readers

257 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Follow the programming.dev instance rules
Keep content related to programming in some way
If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities [email protected]

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

snowe

Ategon

[email protected]

-25

So Much for ‘Learn to Code’ - In the age of AI, computer science is no longer the safe major. (www.theatlantic.com)

submitted 1 year ago by [email protected] to c/programming

22 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Archive

Perhaps nothing has defined higher education over the past two decades more than the rise of computer science and STEM. Since 2016, enrollment in undergraduate computer-science programs has increased nearly 49 percent. Meanwhile, humanities enrollments across the United States have withered at a clip—in some cases, shrinking entire departments to nonexistence.

But that was before the age of generative AI. ChatGPT and other chatbots can do more than compose full essays in an instant; they can also write lines of code in any number of programming languages. You can’t just type make me a video game into ChatGPT and get something that’s playable on the other end, but many programmers have now developed rudimentary smartphone apps coded by AI. In the ultimate irony, software engineers helped create AI, and now they are the American workers who think it will have the biggest impact on their livelihoods, according to a new survey from Pew Research Center. So much for learning to code.

Fiddling with the computer-science curriculum still might not be enough to maintain coding’s spot at the top of the higher-education hierarchy. “Prompt engineering,” which entails feeding phrases to large language models to make their responses more human-sounding, has already surfaced as a lucrative job option—and one perhaps better suited to English majors than computer-science grads.

The potential decline of “learn to code” doesn’t mean that the technologists are doomed to become the authors of their own obsolescence, nor that the English majors were right all along (I wish). Rather, the turmoil presented by AI could signal that exactly what students decide to major in is less important than an ability to think conceptually about the various problems that technology could help us solve.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 15 points 1 year ago (1 children)

As a veteran, there's always a new piece of technology about to make me obsolete.

I've been made obsolete a dozen times now. It's funny how many people still cold call me asking for my help on things.

I'm sure they'll all get the memo that I'm obsolete this time. /s

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago (3 children)

Where I grew up the loggers said the same thing. Sure there are still loggers, but teams that had 30 workers now have 6.

If you don't think LLM and/or AI isn't going to be used to put people out of work to keep the cash flow going to the rich I don't know what to tell you.

[–] [email protected] 3 points 1 year ago

The logger analogy is a misunderstanding of what people with a degree in CS do. Most become software engineers. They're not loggers, they're architects who occasionally have to cut their own logs.

They've spent decades reducing the amount of time they have to spend logging only to be continually outpaced by the growth of demand from businesses and complexity of the end product. I don't think we've reached a peak there yet, if anything the capabilities of AI are opening up even more demand for even more software.

But, ultimately, coding is only a fraction of the job and any halfway decent CS program teaches programming as a means to practice computer science and software engineering. Even when an AI gets to the point that it can produce solid code from the English language, it has a ways to go before replacing a software engineer.

One thing that's for sure: tons of business owners will get richer and pay fewer workers. I think we're going to have to face a reckoning as we reach the limits of what capitalism can sustain. But it's also unpredictable because AI opens up new opportunities for everyone else as well.

[–] [email protected] 2 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Oh, I think it will cause a reduction in jobs - at least compared to if it had not existed. So did interpreted languages, shell scripting, web frameworks, code-generation templates, the dot-com bust, and the 2008 recession.

Some folks are convinced that reduction is happening this year. I've written my share of LLMs and ML code, and I assure you it will not be next year.

The hallucination problem is being dramatically downplayed by the sales people, but reality tends to sort that stuff out.

Over the longer term, there's a feeling among developers that this job is going to both stop sucking so badly, and stop paying so well. I also believe that is coming. But not this year or next.

If anything, we look forward to quite a bit of additional pain and money to clean up after all the all-in-on-day-one AI mistakes being made right now.

After that mess is sorted, a few of us should be able to retire, and a bunch of the rest can switch to part time.

Edit: A key thing folks don't recognize about the in-progress AI revolution is that programming isn't a slow job, before the AI.

Programming is a minefield of preventable mistakes, botched deployments, subtle mistakes, outright security nightmare mistakes, and misunderstood user requests.

The programmer shortage is not because we're all tired of typing so many lines of code, or even of copy/pasting from Stack Overflow, and we just need more of us to do all that lovely typing and pasting.

The programmer shortage is because this job is a minefield of stressful surprises, and we have a high attrition rate.

AI can and will help. But anyone betting on AI as a full replacement in the short run is woefully ignorant of the steep challenges faced by the entire field of programming.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago

I never meant to imply, like the attached article, that this is all happening soon. It doesn't have to happen soon to upend decades long careers.

I'm sure AI will help at first. That's the point with something like this. Get people using it so you can continue to improve it to the point where you don't need the people.

Same thing happened with the loggers. Oh this equipment can't replace a person. It's just here to make a hard job easier. No. No. No it's not the equipment taking your job away. It's that damn spotted owl taking your job.

That kind of makes me wonder in the decades ahead what will be the spotted owl when programmers start getting replaced.

[–] [email protected] 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Code created by a LLM still needs to be interpreted and understood by a human so it can be made useful in a software development context. So yeah the article is exaggerating the impact of AI for coding I think, in my opinion it will become yet another tool at a developer’s disposal to speed up their work

[–] [email protected] 0 points 1 year ago

I personally refuse to use it because how I use it is being used to create a system to replace me, and you can't change my mind on that.