• Drew@sopuli.xyzOPM
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    2 months ago

    This might be a bit controversial, but all those fields he mentioned do have younger people learning how to do the work. Doctors spend 7 or more years doing doctor work under someone else’s watch before they can strike out on their own.

    You could call them junior doctors if you like

    • lemmeBe@sh.itjust.works
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      Nothing controversial there. That person obviously has no idea what they’re talking about, as they’ve clearly never stepped foot on a construction site where junior engineers work alongside senior ones.

      The same goes for other professions.

    • RobotZap10000@feddit.nl
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 months ago

      I was first wondering why this even is a LinkedInLunatic, they gave examples that lead me to believe that they were FOR hiring juniors.

  • thesmokingman@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    2 months ago

    This isn’t a lunatic. This is someone trying to make a point about companies thinking they can use AI to replace devs. Poe’s Law is on heavy display here in these comments.

    Whether or not you have experienced it, there is currently a trend both in recruiting and in millionaire leadership dialogue toward dropping devs for AI codegen. CEOs that don’t understand how anything works (eg Salesforce) think you can just not hire devs because Google’s inflated AI stats that included basic autocomplete in their full AI codegen numbers indicate AI can code. Boards believe generative AI is capable of things it won’t be able to touch for decades. I have to deal with idiotic AI questions from Fortune 500 companies every fucking week.

    From a hiring perspective, it’s becoming incredibly difficult to weed out AI bullshit. For every one qualified candidate I get, I’ve had to drop five or more in a fucking tech screen because, while codegen has given them enough to pass a basic hiring screen that used to weed out a lot more, there’s zero fucking ability to code without Copilot or critical understanding of the code it generates. When I was starting out, the same problem existed at university but got filtered out after graduation fairly quickly.

    The non lunatic here is extending that to other disciplines because it’s a natural next question. He’s not exactly applying a slippery slope; it’s sort of there underneath.

    Edit: valid criticism of the post is that you have to have a degree to code. That’s bullshit. After my first degree, I went back for CS and dropped out because it was a waste of time. It limited my job pool initially; this far into my career it really does nothing. I’ve hired some solid bootcamp devs. I’ve seen shitty bootcamp devs. I’ve also seen a bunch of CS masters who have no fucking clue how to ship production code but can wax poetic about algorithm design. Since I don’t run an R&D department, that doesn’t matter 95% of the time.

    • PeriodicallyPedantic@lemmy.ca
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 months ago

      From a hiring perspective, it’s becoming incredibly difficult to weed out AI bullshit. For every one qualified candidate I get, I’ve had to drop five or more in a fucking tech screen

      God I’m so afraid to lose job now because I could never survive an interview these days.

      I used to shine for things like takehome interview code problems and shit like that, where I had a chance to pause and think a bit and look up definitions and shit.
      But those kinds of toy programs are actually the things that AI is actually good at, so now I can only differentiate myself by coding live in front of interviewers and memorizing trivia, both of which I’m terrible at, and don’t reflect actual work.