Corollary to your complaints: Another downside that I haven't seen on anyone's AI hatelist yet is that it crowds out all other discussion. What happened to everyone talking about languages, protocols, algorithms, architecture, etc.? We can't have those conversations anymore because we're not even sure they matter now. In fact, we probably suspect they don't, hence the not bothering.
Also, anything we do write will just get immediately slurped into AI embeddings, anonymizing it and detaching it from its human source, at most nudging some corner of its vectorized slurry. Maybe someone will ask a question that our content influences, but if that user bothers to thank anyone, he'll thank Claude. Perhaps this is what it feels like to be fully commoditized, fully alienated from one's labor.
Yes I've noticed that too. It seems accomplishments in general have been devalued, it's not specific to languages, protocols, algorithms or architecture. If I have some idea at work, I feel like even that receives less recognition now because of AI. AI has ideas too, what does it matter? Sure, your idea could be good. But we are already drowning in ideas from AIs, everytime you prompt an AI it will tell you dozens of ideas on what you could improve. Who can say which one matters, does any of it really matter anymore? Why care about things that are effortless? That's the impression I get in regards to how people think now.
To go along with that, it's also crowding out a whole generation's worth of labor and innovation. We're not curing cancer, we're churning out TPS reports faster and drowning in Show HN shovelware.
The overlap comes from the cancer-curing-capable people also drowning in AI slop and people using AI to flood the space with ideas on how to solve cancer and funders wanting to see people using AI because they think it will solve cancer, etc.
I don't think it speaks well of Software Engineers the will to delegate the construction of blueprints to unreliable workers. Architects and Civil Engineers know that licensed, professional people that have experience and know-how will execute it in a nearly flawless way. Compared to that, agents might hallucinate, build something completely different to the intended project or leave subtle bugs behind that, in the case of complex systems, the humans in charge will probably not even notice.
A parallel to what you're describing would be the Hyatt Regency collapse. Meticulously designed, yet one small change under the surface lead to one of the worst engineering disasters of that century.
I don't want to think of what the digital equivalent of the Hyatt Regency collapse would be, considering that the software could be deployed all around the globe rather than in one place in one building.
Languages is the biggest bummer to me. It's great the LLMs make languages less relevant, rewrite cheaper, etc. But I love languages and language design. It's sad to think that we're converging on the most common languages in training data, without considering the developer ergonomics and semantics. But, it's been happening for decades, LLMs just put it into maximum overdrive.
Why go see Rome when you can google up some photos? Why climb Mt Everest? Why have your own sex when there's so much porn? The answer is going to be the same it's always been: because we fucking can.
This is true too! I have ADHD-like executive problems, and sometimes doing the boring but necessary stuff is so painful I abandon the project entirely. Now, though? I entrust it to the agent, and even if it's slop it's still done, and this actually gives me the impetus to start moving again.
I am not an ADHDer (though I often wonder if I'm on some spectrum or another), but this is one of the things I have found great success in. If I can yeet through most of the busy work associated with a project, and focus on the stuff that really matters?
TBH, if you're wondering if you're on a spectrum but never bothered to check, my advice is to check. I was always distrusting of labels, then got diagnosed with autism spectrum disorder at the ripe old age of 31. And holy mother of Czestochowa, the story of my life suddenly made so much sense.
I take your point, but unlike everything you mentioned, programming languages have usually been written for others to use, with a handful of Intercal-like exceptions.
Any fully new languages we get will be either doomed from the start, or the language equivalent of TempleOS. Or both.
I'm writing a new language and I know it's doomed. I expect exactly zero users beyond me in the age of AI. But I love languages, I love language design. So, I'm doing it because it's fun and rewarding. The joy I get from seeing my language written out and thinking "I came up with that, that's mine" can't be beaten.
Anyway I have one blog post about it. I'm working on the implementation now, just takes a while. I'm close to having a parser (not semantic analysis) and I'll probably do a dev log.
I think it might be because of the comment to like ratio or something. Hope I am wront, but its like someone doesnt want something generating lots of discussion… in a discussion forum
Also, anything we do write will just get immediately slurped into AI embeddings, anonymizing it and detaching it from its human source, at most nudging some corner of its vectorized slurry. Maybe someone will ask a question that our content influences, but if that user bothers to thank anyone, he'll thank Claude. Perhaps this is what it feels like to be fully commoditized, fully alienated from one's labor.