> I guess now it's our time to adapt to change.

I'm just saddened by the prospect that, for me, "adapting to change" would mean "no longer being able to make a living doing what I actually enjoy". that's why if this is the future, it's a career-killing one for me. Whether or not I stay in the industry, there is no future in my chosen career path, and the alternative paths that people keep bringing up all sound pretty terrible to me.

My only hope is that AI will not achieve the heights that its proponents are trying to reach (I suspect this is the case). I see no other good outcome for me.

If AI does achieve the hyped heights then we're all out of a job, regardless of what we do.

Many people suffer through bullshit jobs[1] so we are privileged to have - at least for a time - done what we really enjoy and got paid for it.

[1] David Graeber father of the term "bullshit jobs"

> I'm just saddened by the prospect that, for me, "adapting to change" would mean "no longer being able to make a living doing what I actually enjoy". that's why if this is the future, it's a career-killing one for me.

Ok and? You don’t think any of the others put out of their work by other forms of computing like you might’ve enjoyed their jobs? You don’t think it might have been career ending for them?

We're all sorry for the other guy when he loses his job to a machine. When it comes to your job, that's different. And it always will be different.

That was 1968. Plus ca change...

The catch is that those people could, barring the AI advances we seem to be seeing, could retrain for an SWE labor market that lagged demand; that wont even be possible for devs put out of work in the future.

Those people who did retrain are the same devs being put out of work - which means they got hit with the setback twice and are worse off than people who started off as devs and thus only got hit once.

Like the allied bomber pilots in WWII looking down below at the firestorm knowing that there is a good chance (~45%) that they too will join their fate only later.

> I realise that I as a developer have put a lot of people out of a job.

For most developers this will not be true. Most apps, websites, compilers, desktop software etc. will not have put anyone out of a job. I certainly never ever put someone out of a job. I made some peoples live easier, but their total working hours didn't shorten and they certainly did not change profession or were replaced. In fact the majority of tasks that my software was applied to would simply have been deemed impossible to do and not have been done and that would have been all there was to it.

Having once worked on a project to improve some customer care software, I know that as a direct result of those improvements, people got fired.

I'm sure they all found new jobs but it did make me think about the consequence of my work.

Other projects involved making freemium games more addictive to suck people into paying. Of course everyone has a choice but playing on people's addictions to make money is an questionable morality.

To my philosophy, the goal of technology should be _precisely_ to get rid of as many jobs as possible.

Unfortunately technology benefits only the 1% in our current society, and job loss is a bad thing (it should not be!)