The rise of AI-powered coding tools has sparked a mix of excitement and trepidation among software developers. These advanced AI systems, such as Anthropic's Claude Code and OpenAI's Codex, can now build entire applications from scratch using text prompts, writing code, running tests, and even fixing bugs with human supervision.
While some developers, like Roland Dreier, a senior software engineer who has contributed to the Linux kernel, hail these tools as revolutionary, others are more cautious. David Hagerty, a developer working on point-of-sale systems, expresses skepticism about the marketing claims, saying that while AI-powered coding tools have immense potential, they won't replace human ingenuity or creativity.
Dreier and others have witnessed significant improvements in productivity, with complex tasks like building a Rust backend service taking 10 times less time to complete. This has enabled developers to tackle projects that would have taken years to implement manually. Brian Westby, a Nike backend engineer who uses Cursor daily, concurs that AI-powered coding tools cut down time on well-defined problems but warns about the risks of "hallucinations" if given too much room to operate.
However, not everyone is convinced that these tools will only bring benefits. Darren Mart, a senior software development engineer at Microsoft, cautions against over-reliance on AI, saying he's only comfortable using them for tasks he already fully understands. He also expresses concerns about the potential for "bad manipulation of data" and technical debt.
For developers working with legacy codebases, AI tools have become essential translators and archaeologists, helping to identify obsolete code and modernize it. Nate Hashem, a staff engineer at First American Financial, praises these tools for making his job more pleasant by speeding up the process of updating older systems.
Despite these benefits, there are concerns about the impact on software development jobs. Kellogg, who has enthusiastically adopted agentic coding, believes that AI-powered coding tools will lead to massive job displacement, especially in junior-level positions. He argues that those who can't adapt to operate at a higher level won't keep their jobs.
The industry is bracing for this shift, with some advocating for changes to education and training to prepare junior developers for the new landscape. Others, like Hagerty, are already seeing the economic implications of this trend, where junior-quality code can be created for less than minimum wage using AI models.
Ultimately, while AI-powered coding tools hold tremendous promise, their adoption will require careful consideration of the benefits and risks involved. Developers must weigh their enthusiasm for these tools against concerns about job displacement and technical debt, and work to ensure that they're used responsibly and effectively in the industry.
While some developers, like Roland Dreier, a senior software engineer who has contributed to the Linux kernel, hail these tools as revolutionary, others are more cautious. David Hagerty, a developer working on point-of-sale systems, expresses skepticism about the marketing claims, saying that while AI-powered coding tools have immense potential, they won't replace human ingenuity or creativity.
Dreier and others have witnessed significant improvements in productivity, with complex tasks like building a Rust backend service taking 10 times less time to complete. This has enabled developers to tackle projects that would have taken years to implement manually. Brian Westby, a Nike backend engineer who uses Cursor daily, concurs that AI-powered coding tools cut down time on well-defined problems but warns about the risks of "hallucinations" if given too much room to operate.
However, not everyone is convinced that these tools will only bring benefits. Darren Mart, a senior software development engineer at Microsoft, cautions against over-reliance on AI, saying he's only comfortable using them for tasks he already fully understands. He also expresses concerns about the potential for "bad manipulation of data" and technical debt.
For developers working with legacy codebases, AI tools have become essential translators and archaeologists, helping to identify obsolete code and modernize it. Nate Hashem, a staff engineer at First American Financial, praises these tools for making his job more pleasant by speeding up the process of updating older systems.
Despite these benefits, there are concerns about the impact on software development jobs. Kellogg, who has enthusiastically adopted agentic coding, believes that AI-powered coding tools will lead to massive job displacement, especially in junior-level positions. He argues that those who can't adapt to operate at a higher level won't keep their jobs.
The industry is bracing for this shift, with some advocating for changes to education and training to prepare junior developers for the new landscape. Others, like Hagerty, are already seeing the economic implications of this trend, where junior-quality code can be created for less than minimum wage using AI models.
Ultimately, while AI-powered coding tools hold tremendous promise, their adoption will require careful consideration of the benefits and risks involved. Developers must weigh their enthusiasm for these tools against concerns about job displacement and technical debt, and work to ensure that they're used responsibly and effectively in the industry.
. i mean, sure, 10x less time for complex tasks is lit, but what about when we're stuck with 'hallucinations'? and don't even get me started on legacy codebases... seems like ai's just trying to fix our messes instead of making them better 
. and kellogg thinks junior devs will be ghosted by the AI? that's not a good look for anyone 
. we need to prep these dev jobs or risk getting left behind 
. If we rely too much on these tools we risk losing the creative juices that make dev so awesome 
. And what's with all this "hallucination" talk? 
Can't they just stick to building apps like they're supposed to 
?
️. We need to find a balance between human ingenuity and AI power 
. And omg, the job displacement thing? 
. We need to use them wisely and not let them dictate how we code 
. And what about the economy? 
We need to make sure that junior devs aren't getting screwed over by AI models that can build apps for less than minimum wage 
.
.
It's like, what's the point of even havin' a degree in computer science anymore? I mean, I'm sure those AI tools are gonna write some genius code...yeah right 
. And don't even get me started on the whole "hallucinations" thing - like, how do we know that ain't just 'cause we're too stupid to understand what's goin' on 
)
)
. I've spent years honing my skills on old-school IDEs and learning to debug by trial and error. The thought of relying solely on a machine to build entire applications from scratch makes me nervous 
.
.
.
. of course there are risks involved but that's just part of innovation, right? and let's be real who doesn't love having more time to play games or hang out with friends instead of staring at code for hours on end 
Also, I feel like some of these tools are already giving devs a lot more power than they know how to handle 
, so we gotta be careful not to create any "hallucinations" 
. And yeah, using these tools for old legacy codebases is a big help, but can't we just train humans to do that stuff instead? 
It feels like we're getting too reliant on AI and not thinking about the bigger picture...
! They're literally changing the game for developers, making it possible to build entire apps from scratch in no time 
.
.
. It's all about finding a balance and using these tools to augment our skills, not replace them 
.
. We need to make sure that junior developers are equipped with the skills they need to adapt to this new landscape 
. I mean, if AI models can create junior-quality code for less than minimum wage, that's a big deal 
.
. Bring on the AI-powered coding tools! 