They’re laying people off and replacing them with chat gpt generating code? That seems... aggressive. Or are they laying off devs who copy-pasted gpt-generate code?
The way I see it, if you code without it, you won't compete with the speed and value.
And they are not going to back fill those roles
I’ll admit my bias of having seen enough vacuous industry hype over the years to be naturally skeptical. Heck, I worked in a marketing department once where I helped manufacture the stuff (forgive me father for I have sinned, in my defense they did fire me after three months in a layoff). But my few personal experiences with ChatGPT were pretty disappointing and I’m actually looking for someone to tell me otherwise.
My personal use of gpt4 (also daily) is: correct, rephrase spelling from my brain dump, make python plots (stylize, convert, add subplots, labels, handle indexing when things get inverted), makw short shell scripts (generated 2FA, login vpn through console using 2fa, make script of disabling keyboard etc), and help debug my code (my situation is this, here's some code, what do you suggest?).
The last part is an interesting one for people with attention deficiency disorders, like myself, where procrastination can be conquered when there's an assistant that keeps you on track.
Aha, I’ll def have to give it a whirl. My procrastination ability is world class.
You can only make employees more productive.. this in turn could, in theory, lessen the need for developers in the long run, but it assumes the company will not bother to use the extra bandwidth for other projects.
This is exactly what would happen if ChatGPT was actually a productivity boost for senior devs. I don't know why some idiots on here keep insisting businesses want to get rid of people when that's not how the game works at all. Extra work capacity will always be used. Regardless of what payroll costs, what's always more important is the ROI.
Neither of those three would function nor would they throw an error. Prompts to correct itself would not improve things.
So I did the natural thing and started to debug myself. At which point, I couldn’t help but ask myself why I was debugging machine generated code when I could not be lazy and actually build it from first principles.
Nah they deserve to eat shit and the staffing agencies hired to fix the bad AI code will undoubtedly be people abroad who barely speak English and will only tangle it up worse. I would actually pay to be a fly on the wall in those meetings listening to people lose their minds in frustration.
With respect to GPT etc. as a copilot, the current dialogue seems to focus on "ask for GPT to generate code to do X" then "just paste in the error message to fix bugs in the code GPT generates"
A.) Why is GPT generating code that results in simple compiler errors (that is why GPT probably shouldn't be used to generate any code / replace devs for real projects yet), and
B.) error messages are (just guessing here) probably <1% of the actual errors in most codebases.
I personally know of a few large companies laying off devs over this.
IMO, the tech debt we're going to see in 6 months will probably be huge. Good now to start a staffing agency of human experts who can come in and fix this type of problem (extricating massive amounts of code generated by GPT without starting from scratch) because there will be a bunch of fires to put out and those fires will be worth $