The cost of generating lines of code which look good has dropped 90%.... Take that as you will.

The majority of software engineers today, (mostly in big tech) are not interested in software engineering. They studied it to make money. This happened before LLMs. Add the fact that software development isn’t deterministic. And you have a perfect storm of chaos.

But our discipline has been through similar disruptions in the past. I think give it a few years then maybe we’ll settle on something sane again.

I do think the shift is permanent though. Either you adapt to use these LLMs well or you will struggle to be competitive (in general)

>I do think the shift is permanent though. Either you adapt to use these LLMs well or you will struggle to be competitive (in general)

That certainly isn't true if what this article suggests is true.

> I find it interesting how starkly bimodal attitudes toward employer loyalty are.

It's because employers create a narrative which makes people think they are valued beyond the transactional. People develop relationships with employers and have trust in them. In my experience it is very easy to fall into this narrative unless you have experience otherwise.

The article forgot to mention websockets add state to the server! Load balancing will require sticking sessions. At scale this tends to mean separating websocket servers completely from http servers.

What if they are providing negative value?

> this author play acts his way through the solution.

I thought it was a nice bit of irony. At work there's so much play-acting but all in a serious tone.

I wonder if people had the same reaction when children started using calculators.

Or slide rule! That devil, it wrote the homework of our granddads!

This is another way to determine if a company is a "start-up"! If you work at a company that has OKRs, it's no longer a start-up or it's time to bail because said start-up is about to fail.

> because said start-up is about to fail.

How come?

> The US, UK, EU and realistically most developed countries I would say have fairly similar quality of life within margin of error.

Having lived in the EU (Netherlands) and the US (California), I would say the inequality in the US is much worse. Especially in larger cities. To the point where I sometimes wonder if I'm living in a "developed" country.

I'm British. When I visit the US I would agree that inequality is significantly higher, but it also seems quite clear that overall wealth is significantly higher too. Second and third tier cities in the US are clearly still fairly well off in a way that just isn't the case across Europe.

The thing I tend to always fall back on is the last part of my comment. You don't want to be poor in the US; there is no bottom. Whereas if you're poor in Europe usually there's a minimum standard that you'll fall to.

For most people the relevant factor I think is what the QoL in their cohort is like. I say it's a bit of a wash, because basically, if we limit the discussion to EU and US, if you're well off the US is probably better, if you're poor Europe is probably better, if you're in the middle then there are trade offs.

Do I want to live in a country where it’s comfortable to be poor? That implies everything from people defending poor as a lifestyle, such as classmates insistently you that working in class is a stupid lifestyle choice, to people joining the country on the basis that they don’t like producing much, and living in a general country that is second at everything (or falls down to Chile level in terms of studying math in school).

If I had a passport for the US, I’d move yesterday.

There is more to life than "producing much" and "getting rich". There is no single answer and it depends on preferences and tradeoffs. But, labeling an ideology that takes care of the unfortunate, and lets the people live life without "if you dont produce much or work every minute of your life towards getting rich" as lazy or incentivising to be poor is just naive and ignorant.

I'm saying as someone from Asia having lived equal number of years in both US and EU.

> You don't want to be poor in the US; there is no bottom.

How do you figure? US has SNAP, Medicaid, UI, TANF (for families with children), Section 8 housing, SSD, SSI, Childcare Assistance amongst other programs.

These aren’t much of course but are something.

There is also a lot of impact from immigration that the US has that Europe has not. Immigrants tend not to be at the high end. The US has had a large influx of immigrants (around 14% of the whole population right now) vs just 6% for Europe. (from quick Google checks.) I'm not saying that is good or bad, but if you keep adding at the lowest end of income you increase the inequality if the most wealthy are experiencing gains.

There are a lot of big egos in team sports, and in high performing teams you often have a team full of big egos, although there are usually a few "team players". I wonder what coaches think about ego.