The hypothetical that we're 8x as productive but the work isn't as fun isn't "society becoming shittier".

We are very well paid for very cushy work. It's not good for anyone's work to get worse, but it's not a huge hit to society if a well-paid cushy job gets less cushy.

And presumably people buy our work because it's valuable to them. Multiplying that by 8 would be a pretty big benefit to society.

I don't want my job to get less fun, but I would press that button without hesitation. It would be an incredible trade for society at large.

I've seen plenty enough people try, really try, to get into software development; but they just can't do it.

So I mean... Yeah

Is software more comfortable generally than many other lines of work? Yes probably

Is it always soft and cushy? No, not at all. It is often high pressure and high stress

All I can suggest is see a doctor as soon as possible and talk to them about it

I cannot remember events, conversations, or details about important things. I have partially lost my ability to code, because I get partway through implementing a feature and forget what pieces I've done and which pieces still need to be done

I can still write it, but the quality of my work has plummeted, which is part of why I'm off on leave now

  2,350 contributions in 2021
  2,661 contributions in 2022
  381 contributions in 2023 <--- burnout
  794 contributions in 2024 <--- recovery
  1,632 contributions in 2025 (so far)

I hope my recovery doesn't take that long, but if it does it does

I would rather give myself the space and time to really get better, rather than simply rush back to work and burn out again

1. 1 tablespoon of cold extracted cod liver oil EVERY MORNING

2. 30 min of running 3-4 times a week

3. 2-3 weight lifting sessions every week

4. regular walks.

5. cross train on different intellectually stimulating subjects. doing the same cognitive tasks over and over is like repetive motion on your muscles

6. regularly scheduled "fallow mind time." I set aside an 30 min to an hour everyday to just sit in a chair and let my mind wander. its not meditation. I jsut sit and let my mind drift to whatever it wants.

7. while it should be avoided, in the event that you have to crunch, RESPECT THE COOLDOWN. take downtime after. don't let your nontechnical leads talk you out of it. thinking hard for extended periods of time requires appropriate recovery.

the human brain is a complex system and while we think of our mind as abstract and immaterial, it is in reality a whole lot of physical systems that grow, change and use resources the same way any other physical system in your body does. just like muscles need to recover after a workout to get stronger, so too does your brain after extended periods of deep thinking.

But I am struggling to remember things I did not used to struggle with

Going to an event on a weekend with my wife and completely forgetting that we ran into a friend there. Not just "oh yeah I forgot we saw them", like feeling my wife is lying to me when she tells me we saw them. Texting them to ask and they agree we saw each other

These are people I trust with my life so I believe they would not gaslight me, my own memory has just failed

Many examples like this, just completely blacking out things. Not forgetting everything, but blacking out large pieces of my daily life. Even big things

Disclaimer: talk to your doctor. I don’t know if your doctor can tell you whether this is a good idea, but it might help in some countries with good medical systems.

Software devs jobs getting less cushy is no biggie. We can afford to amp up the efficiency. Teachers jobs got "less cushy" -> not great for users/consumers or the ppl in those jobs. Doctors jobs got "less cushy" -> not great for users/consumers or the ppl in those jobs. Even waiters/ check-out staff, stockists jobs at restaurants, groceries and AMZ got "less cushy" -> not great for users/consumers or the ppl in those jobs. at least not when you need to call someone for help.

These things are not as disconnected as they seem. Businesses are in fact made up of people.

1. Efficiency measures as written to benchmark this coupling with economic productivity overall

2. Monetary assessments of value in the context of businesses spending money corresponding with social value

3. The gains of economic productivity being distributed across society to any degree, or the effect of this disparity itself being negligible

4. The negative externalities of these processes scaling less quickly than whatever we're measuring in our productivity metric

5. Aforementioned externalities being able to scale to even a lesser degree in lockstep with productivity without crashing all of the above, if not causing even more catastrophic outcomes

I have very little faith in any of these assumptions

You're right in general, but I don't think that'll save you/us from OP's statement. This is simple economic incentives at play. If AI-coding is even marginally more economically efficient (i.e. more for less) the "old way" will be swept aside at breathtaking pace (as we're seeing). The "from my cold dead hands" hand-coding crowd may be right, but they're a transitional historical footnote. Coding was always blue-collar white-collar work. No-one outside of coders will weep for what was lost.

I suspect we'll find that the amount of technical debt and loss of institutional knowledge incured by misuse of these tools was initially underappreciated.

I don't doubt that the industry will be transformed, but that doesn't mean that these tools are a panacea.

I also specifically used the term "misuse" to significantly weaken my claim. I mean only to say that the risks and downsides are often poorly understood, not that there are no good uses.

On the scale I’ve been doing this (20 years), that hasn’t been the case.

Rails was massively more efficient for what 90% of companies where building. But it never had anywhere near a 90% market share.

It doesn’t take 1000 engineers to build CRUD apps, but companies are driven to grow by forces other than pure market efficiency.

There are still plenty of people using simple text editors when full IDEs have offered measurable productivity boosts for decades.

>(as we’re seeing)

I work at a big tech company. Productivity per person hasn’t noticeably increased. The speed that we ship hasn’t noticeably increased. All that’s happening is an economic downturn.

But AI seems to be different in that it claims to replace programmers, instead of augment them. Yes, higher productivity means you don't have to hire as many people, but with AI tools there's specifically the promise that you can get rid of a bunch of your developers, and regardless of truth, clueless execs buy the marketing.

Stupid MBAs at big companies see this as a cost reduction - so regardless of the utility of AI code-generation tools (which may be high!), or of the fact that there are many other ways to get productivity benefits, they'll still try to deploy these systems everywhere.

That's my projection, at least. I'd love to be wrong.

But no matter how hard cost cutters wanted to, they were never able to actually reduce the total number of devs outside of major economic downturns.

This feels like kicking someone when they’re down! Given the current state of corporate and political America, it doesn’t look likely there will be any pressure for anything but enshittification to me. Telling people at the coal face to stay cheerful seems unlikely to help. What mechanism do you see for not giving up to actually change the experience of people in 10 ish years time?

That isn't what they said tho. They said you have to do something, not that you should just be happy. Doing something can involve things that historically had a big impact in improving working conditions, like collective action and forming unions.

The opposite advice would be: "Everything's fucked, nothing you can do will change it, so just give up." Needless to say that is bad advice unless you are a targeted individual in a murderous regime or similar.

Correct. But it becoming shittier is the strong default, with forces that you constantly have to fight against.

And the reason is very simple: Someone profits from it being shittier and they have a lot of patience and resources.

Realizing that attitude in myself at times has given me so much more peace of mind. Just in general, not everything needs to be as fast and efficient as possible.

Not to mention the times where in the end I spend a lot of time and energy in trying to be faster only to end up with this xkcd: https://xkcd.com/1319/

As far as LLM use goes, I don't need moar velocity! so I don't try to min max my agentic workflow just to squeeze out X amount more lines code.

In fact, I don't really work with agentic workflows to begin with. I more or less still use LLMs as tools external to the process. Using them as interactive rubber duckies. Things like deciphering spaghetti code, do a sanity check on code I wrote (and being very critical of the suggestions they come up with), getting a quick jump start on stuff I haven't used again (how do I get started with X of Y again?), that sort of stuff.

Using LLMs in the IDE and other agentic use is something I have worked with. But to me it falls under what I call "lazy use" where you are further and further removed from the creation of code, the reasoning behind it, etc. I know it is a highly popular approach with many people on HN. But in my experience, it is an approach that makes skills of experienced developers atrophy and makes sure junior developers are less likely to pick them up. Making both overly reliant on tools that have been shown to be less than reliable when the output isn't properly reviewed.

I get the firm feeling that velocity crowd works in environments where they are judged by the amount of tickets closed. Basically "feature complete, test green, merged, move on!". In that context, it isn't really "important" that the tests that are green are also refactored by the thing itself, just that they are green. It is a symptom of a corporate environment where the focus is on these "productivity" metrics. From that perspective I can fully see the appeal for LLM heavy workflows as they most certainly will have an impact on metrics like "tickets closed" or "lines of code written".

It does when you are competing for getting and keeping employment opportunities.

If you're a salaried or hourly employee, you aren't paid for your output, you are paid for your time, with minimum expectations of productivity.

If you complete all your work in an hour... you still owe seven hours based on the expectations of your employment agreement, in order to earn your salary and benefits.

If you'd rather work in an output based capacity, you'll want to move to running your own contacting business in a fixed-bid type capacity.

There's legal distinctions between part time and full time employment. Hence, you are expected to put in a minimum number of hours. However, there's nothing to say that the minimum expectation is the minimum for classification for full time employment.

If AI lets you get the job done in 1 hour when you otherwise would have worked overtime, you're still technically being paid to work more than that one hour, and I don't know of any employer that'll pay you to do nothing.

My company has been preparing for this for a while now, I guess, as my backlog clearly has years' worth of work in it and positions of people who have left the org remain unfilled. My colleagues at other companies are in a similar situation. Considering round after round of layoffs, if I got ahead a little bit and found that I had nothing else to do, I'd be worried for my job.

Society becoming shittier isn’t inevitable

Yes, I agree, but the deck is usually stacked against the worker, especially in America. I doubt this will be the issue that promotes any sort of collectivism.

If the structures and systems that are in-place only facilitate life getting more difficult in some way, then it probably will, unless it doesn't.

Housing getting nearly unownable is a symptom of that. Climate change is another.