![[Sigma]](/data/avatars/m/701/701747.jpg?1685439978){kind=avatar}
[Sigma]
Member
Really? That's different from the videos I watched.
-
Hey, guest user. Hope you're enjoying NeoGAF! Have you considered registering for an account? Come join us and add your take to the daily discourse.
Revisiting: Jonathan Blow devtalk "we don't expect software to work anymore"
Hawking Radiation
Member
The advances in AI is legit scary. Not just for the above but as a driving force in creativity. Artists around the world should worry.
The other day I used Bing image generator to create a BMW with Lamborghini aesthetics and the results were rather interesting.
GHG
Member
Nope, it was that change in design (which meant the angle of attack range is different to other planes) in combination with the software that caused all of the issues.
It was the ultimately MCAS system that caused all the problems.
https://aviationweek.com/shownews/d...pletes-review-new-737-max-angle-attack-sensor
Roni
Gold Member
I'm a Quality Assurance Specialist for a retailer in my country. I've been begging for standardized documentation for years and it would help the QA department so much...
QA is a complicated area in IT as a whole, but lack of documentation is the number one driver for bad quality in software: a test is meaningless unless you have an expectation to compare with reality and the expectation is the documentation...
Last edited:
DeltaPolarBear
Member
They made a hardware change and add software to try to correct it.
But that is not the problem; they HID the existence of both the hardware and software to lie about not needing pilots to be retrained. To make the plane more attractive to buy. And they hid their existence by not putting it in the manual. So when things went wrong the pilot didn't know what to do because the problem isn't suppose to exist.
StueyDuck
Member
This is like the "that's not real communism" arguments.
In theory it's not agile. But it's what the method has ended up being.
The point of agile is for reactionary quick development. But it's ended up becoming "ah that's good enough, we'll push the rest for now".
There's nothing secret or subliminal about social norms dictating 'interest' though.
The ratios of 99:1 in gender dominated fields aren't born out of innate interests, we're often taught what to avoid before we learn how to speak.
I don't think Blow is wrong about certain innate differences existing, but online social media discourse is incapable of any nuance, or arguments in good faith. Its just echo chambers celebrating or crucifying views.
Before we learn how to speak, we’re conditioned toward or away from computer science and engineering professions? Fantastical premise there.
People tend to look for ways to downplay sex differences for good reasons, as historically they were used to as a basis to discriminate against women. We should be mindful when discussing it. However, let's not invent nonsense like babies being conditioned for particular professions straight out of the womb.
There is a lot of support and encouragement for women in CS and engineering in the US these days, which is great, as there absolutely should be. In a free and just society, boys and girls should both be able to pursue their dreams and aspirations freely. There are obviously still inroads that need to be made to ensure that freedom both in the US and abroad.
Sex differences also do exist, though, which have a non-trivial influence on what men and women are interested in pursuing. Right now around 20% of CS grads in the US are women, and that ratio has decreased for women significantly in recent history, down from 40% and 30%, despite social advocacy for women in STEM ramping up significantly over the same period.
Are infant girls subject to anti-computer science conditioning that they weren't subjected to 10 years ago, or 20 years ago? Or should we also acknowledge other factors beyond oppression, like women making their own choices about what they want to pursue in life, and that being okay too whether it's in STEM or something else? Women have agency.
Last edited:
Greirat
Member
Whenever I open Windows Task Manager and see the dozens and dozens of processes running that I don't even want running, I think of this talk. Intel and AMD give us more powerful hardware, then Microsoft immediately uses up the resources with more background junk. The right click menu in Windows is now slower than it was 20 years ago. Blow is 100% right here.
Kataploom
Gold Member
I was saying the same to a co-worker the other day arguing about AI, I told him that there will be a seniority problem in the industry ten years from now and internet will be complaining about how a senior programmer 10 years ago was immensely more skillful due to being formed without any magic tool, so when hard issues appear in the code we'll be the ones to be called because the new seniors won't be able to figure out some issues we are used to solve manually now.
I'm not from a computer science background, I'm self taught since forever and can easily see my limitations whenever "designing or programming stuff" isn't the task, like setting up a Linux server or some other server stuff, my field is frontend web development so I haven't needed to touch those tasks and some of them like setting up a project environment require sometimes fixing something that purer engineers have more experience with.
I guess the same will happen to new developers but with normal code problems due to a lack of experience solving them manually, the difference is that once in my domain, I'm very proficient and can put some good stuff, but these new programmers in the domain they are expect to do great, they will be lacking some essential skills we got by having absolute agency of the whole process and training our brains to think logically in a way errors are minimum and trackable.
Also, reading code takes like 10x more time than writing it, it's very hard to understand code from other people, having to read a generated code and then fixing an error or making small adjustments seem like a productivity nightmare.
NiiloPielinen
Member
What is this myth that programmers in the past didn't have bugs in their code or that their games came out perfect ?
StueyDuck
Member
did anyone actually say that, people are saying the quality of development has dipped tremendously and people are discerning their reasoning as to why that would be happening. that is all
Last edited:
IlGialloMondadori
Member
I don’t think it has actually dipped. I think it’s always been bad, forever. There is good software now, and bad software, just as there was at the beginning of software.
StueyDuck
Member
i can't speak on gamings behalf, i have never worked in the gaming sector, but in the industry of development as a whole there has been a shift to output = better than quality = better, this obviously isn't a blanket statement for all development across the globe, but the way development is generally looked at and expected today is SaaS, release now, fix later. it wasn't like that before.
Some studios/development houses thrive in those conditions, but it's become clear that it doesn't suit all situations. It also allows for (as someone else posted an expose earlier) juniors to essentially be hired to not really do much work or work considered "easy". Project leads are pushed to get as much output out there as possible , so why put the new guy on a new system he has never seen before on anything marginally difficult if you need to see results by the end of the month. What in my experience ends up happening is the senior devs end up with more work and also end up having to train and help the new junior devs who don't really have a deep enough knowledge of the code behind that they should have. Whereas the onboarding process could have been alot smoother if there wasn't so much pressure to produce a new live release so often. Again this doesn't represent every company ever, just a trend i personally have notice over the coming up to 14 years now in the industry.
Last edited:
IlGialloMondadori
Member
Yeah I’m a software dude too, prob 20 years in the game. Feels like same shit different day to me, just different flavours of shit. It’s always been about output, just like anything where you’re producing something.
I don’t know for sure, but my guess is quality metrics have been the same forever. Something like 3/4 of projects failing since time began. New people coming in is always hard, forever.
nush
Member
There's a blog post that made the rounds recently...
I’ve been employed in tech for years, but I’ve almost never worked - Emmanuel Maggiori
When Twitter fired half of its employees in 2022, and most tech giants followed suit, I wasn’t surprised. In fact, I think little will change for those companies. After being employed in the tech sector for years, I have come to the conclusion that most people in tech don’t work. I don’t mean we...emaggiori.com
Big corporations have trouble getting things done. Too much bureaucracy and bloat. But they're capturing a big chunk of the talent in the industry thanks to superior compensation.
Basically this blog has just discovered Bullshit Jobs.
Well worth a read as it's all by design and not even related exclusively to the tech industries.
Amazon.com: Bullshit Jobs: A Theory: 9781501143311: Graeber, David: Books
Amazon.com: Bullshit Jobs: A Theory: 9781501143311: Graeber, David: Books
www.amazon.com
StueyDuck
Member
i mean i wouldn't discount your experiences, everyone has their own. It sucks that either way we are experiencing this, Things should have gotten better.
don't get me started about how awful onboarding has always been even without the added pressure from higher ups for output, plus source documentation, what is that, companies hate that.
Last edited:
IlGialloMondadori
Member
Totally agree. Feel me, I’m frustrated too. As a lead, I get lots of pressure to deliver with my team of 12. Generally I love delivering and it frustrates me when people just don’t show up enough/care enough - I just want people to have fun, have a laugh, and show up every day for the team, get that trust.
Maybe I’ve just given over to being cynical that it’s just a high pressure trade where money is on the line for people above my pay grade, for better or worse, and to just fight the battles I can fight.
I get the bozo theory of Jobs, not in the dumb way where people think he’s talking about diversity, but in the way where if you get people in who don’t care, or have the wrong mindset, or are protective of their jobs, they multiply and you’ll never get them out, and quality and productivity will drop. HR where I’m at is a complete joke, as is management. We literally have a DevOps AND and a tech ops department because the tech ops guys started the dev ops team so they could control it, effectively creative two tech ops departments with different remits without direct context of project work instead of, you know, empowering the people who actually have the context and getting the work done. Now you’ve got two packs of idiots who have work queues you have to wait for who come in to do things they don’t fully understand in the context of the entire solution, because they are protecting their own jobs. They spread the bullshit about cowboy devs and being dangerous, while slowing everything down and making bad mistakes. But their roots are so deep now they’re never getting out.
Last edited:
LegendOfKage
Member
Good video, and good points being made. That is concerning. It also reminds me of this video. I've been a fan of Blow since Braid, but I became a fan of him for more than his games after seeing this interview from 10 years ago:
It brings up a lot of memories of how no one in the press would strongly criticize Microsoft for their original intentions with Xbox One, and how so many in the press and the industry were so quick to blame "entitled" gamers for their valid concerns. Along with a few other issues from roughly the same time, this was one more thing that solidified the "us vs them" mentality that gaming journalists created, driving many people to the independent gaming press offered by you tube.
I also have to wonder if Cliffy B is still using his Xbox One to watch all his cable television. I'm guessing not.
Last edited:
IlGialloMondadori
Member
Oh yeah, and onboarding lol.
Literally every job I’ve been on has basically not had any onboarding, or if they’ve had it, it’s been counterproductive or useless. You basically need the skill of just, how do I get the info I need to get shit done, and how do I find the people who know and make them tell me.
Come on now - you even acknowledged the real point later in the post, there's need for this.
But to your point at the end - I don't know the data today, I suspect things have changed (for the better too), and continue to change, but the general debate (especially what JB was referring to) was around existing working/educated pool, which has already gone through their social-upbringing over past 2-4 decades.
And this isn't just about STEM or Women - Men are equally being steered away from particular subjects, arguably even more aggressively so (depending on where you grew up too of course). While I witnessed 99:1 ratio in STEM in my home-country in favour of Men for most of 80ies and 90ies, I also saw the reverse in social-science focused studies for women. That kind of overwhelming majority preferences just don't get explained away with personal choice, even if you are objectively more qualified for what you picked.
I agree, I just disagree with the size of influence. And given how deeply integrated social norms are into everything we do, it's impossible to really decouple that influence from anyone's personal choice or even just interest.
Well - I could be an ass and point out that the age most people make choices about their education future, most developed countries legally don't recognise individuals having the mental.... 'capacity' for such agency. Something about being easily influenced and such...
Again - applies to both genders though.
SLESS
Member
This could happen, and I wonder will it mean even less innovation in the future or more? Can AI have the imagination that conceived jumps in gaming like Doom or Diablo for example?
I miss the 90s
Exactly, not even just games. it's like people forget that a Therac-25 bug was killing people with Xrays in the 80s.
ReBurn
Gold Member
It is interesting that you think this is how it will go. AI testing and fixing the code humans write. I find it interesting for a few reasons.
First, QA has been a dying discipline for a while now. With the move to agile methodologies and MVP philosophies traditional testers have been largely seen as unnecessary, which is one of the reasons they're scrambling to unionize. They're trying to hold on to jobs that are largely redundant. Software already tests more pre-release code than humans do. Most independent software companies I speak with when looking to outsource work don't even have a QA function because they believe their agile processes deliver high enough quality without it.
Second, QA doesn't actually fix code because that isn't typically its function. QA sends code back to origin for rework when defects are found. That's why it is seen as inefficient in an agile environment. The goal is to push forward, hence why testing is automated and run while code is being developed. A lot of organizations see code-based unit testing by developers as sufficient when paired with automated UI/front-end testing. We can argue whether it's sufficient, but it doesn't matter since manual testers are dying out regardless.
Third, AI is more likely to be writing the code than testing it. Software development has become such a relatively simple activity since the turn of the century. High level programming languages paired with runtime frameworks have abstracted the complexity of driving computer systems away from developers. One of the questions I ask developers when I interview them is the difference between stack and heap memory. Almost none know because they don't have to care. Coding today is commodity work more like assembling a puzzle than anything, which is what is making it so easy for GPT to do it. If a robot writes the code then chances are mistakes will be low enough that it won't need a QA cycle.
ReBurn
Gold Member
There were never illusions that code was perfect. In my decades of writing code I never once worked on a system that didn't have a defect backlog. It came down to whether the defects were critical enough to prevent release. Some were never fixed.
I've met plenty of arrogant developers over the years who believed that their code never had defects. They were all humbled by a critical bug at one time or another.
Clear
CliffyB's Cock Holster
The issue I think is that there's virtually no wholly bespoke-written programs anymore; everyone uses libraries and various sorts of "black-box" middleware solutions to make their work match up in all regards to current standards, particularly in function and UI.
The premise of using these is that you save a whole bunch of time and effort by taking the solution "off the shelf", but its all predicated on these things operating flawlessly within the desired parameters -which may not always be the case.
The premise of using these is that you save a whole bunch of time and effort by taking the solution "off the shelf", but its all predicated on these things operating flawlessly within the desired parameters -which may not always be the case.
I could spend a long time ranting how wrong most companies are on that - but it's kinda moot, that's literally the point of JBs video.
I will say though that the more established tech organizations don't employ QA Testing - but QA Engineering, which does help.
LLMs are more similar to humans than robots when it comes to making mistakes. I've tried ChatGPT in test-driven development (ie - proper iterative workflow like a human programmer, with test & deploy cycles) and it makes mistakes all the time. It does learn and fix, and can eventually iterate to a functioning result (assuming the tests are good) but those testing guardrails are the 'only' guarantee it may get there.
Now sure, we'll get better models over time - but unless paradigm of how they solve problems is completely changed, their ability to test will be just as important as writing code.
Also the whole other part is that for writing inefficient but functional code we don't really need AIs, but AIs should eventually be able to reason about performance and optimization (and all those low-level details your fresh-grads no longer care about) much better than a human could. The next generation of compilers will likely make current stuff look like abacuses.
Last edited:
Killer8
Member
The consumer has essentially given permission for shoddy software quality to permeate in the way it has. There are numerous technical and bureaucratic reasons behind the curtains for why the quality of software is declining, but i'd be more interested in knowing what affect it actually has on sales. I'd guess: zilch. Blow's thought of "we don't expect software to work anymore" stops just short of "- but we still buy it anyway", so as interesting as his analysis is, in a way it doesn't even really matter to delve into the why.
Companies know they can consistently get away with just releasing a broken product and then patching later. If the backlash gets too heated, all it takes is a nicely formatted apology letter on Twitter to the tune of "we can do better", and all seems to be forgiven in a matter of months. Future sales will barely be put in jeapordy. Before pre-ordering the next hyped up game, the consumer doesn't even stop and think about what a disaster the last one was. When the next Boeing plane enters service, will anyone even be thinking of the 737 MAX?
There is even the strange phenomenon, seen with Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky, where releasing a busted product and then later patching it to the standard it should've been can almost net additional kudos for an developer. One part because the game is now in a good place, and the other part because the developer is viewed as somehow heroic for going back to correct their mistake. A psychological analysis on why that happens would be interesting.
Companies know they can consistently get away with just releasing a broken product and then patching later. If the backlash gets too heated, all it takes is a nicely formatted apology letter on Twitter to the tune of "we can do better", and all seems to be forgiven in a matter of months. Future sales will barely be put in jeapordy. Before pre-ordering the next hyped up game, the consumer doesn't even stop and think about what a disaster the last one was. When the next Boeing plane enters service, will anyone even be thinking of the 737 MAX?
There is even the strange phenomenon, seen with Cyberpunk and No Man's Sky, where releasing a busted product and then later patching it to the standard it should've been can almost net additional kudos for an developer. One part because the game is now in a good place, and the other part because the developer is viewed as somehow heroic for going back to correct their mistake. A psychological analysis on why that happens would be interesting.
Fredrik
Member
They deserve the praise.
Hello Games has iterated No Man’s Sky far beyond what they first promised, I think they’re up at about 30 big game changing updates now, and every update is still free.
Most devs who add anything substantial put that in expansions we have to pay for.
They are born out of innate interests. It's modern society that teaches and pushes for the opposite, at its own detriment.
These differences can be observed in babies only a few days old. No societal influence there.
Matthew Doucette
Neo Member
An appreciation post:
OP, thanks for sharing this talk. I have been getting back into listening to Jonathan Blow again. It's refreshing to hear his breakdown on games and development.
OP, thanks for sharing this talk. I have been getting back into listening to Jonathan Blow again. It's refreshing to hear his breakdown on games and development.
EviLore, thanks for sharing this as well! Interesting critic on agile development and how it fails (when it fails). People cater to the measurement of their work rather than the real work they are supposed to do. (Going after the grade rather than the knowledge the grade was supposed to represent. Something I pulled from Robert Pirsig.)There's a blog post that made the rounds recently...
I’ve been employed in tech for years, but I’ve almost never worked - Emmanuel Maggiori
When Twitter fired half of its employees in 2022, and most tech giants followed suit, I wasn’t surprised. In fact, I think little will change for those companies. After being employed in the tech sector for years, I have come to the conclusion that most people in tech don’t work. I don’t mean we...
rofif
Can’t Git Gud
And the weirdest thing. Nobody has the internet switch. It's a collective of servers essentially so it will never go down
01011001
Banned
ironically this is true for this very forum as well.
ever since the last big update, I can't remember when it was, many things are either worse or wonky.
for example, when I'm on my phone, and I want to upload an image, I sometimes can't click directly on the "+ Image" button on the bottom left, but instead have to click slightly to the left of it for it to work.
this is reproduceable on multiple browsers too.
then, before the big update you could edit a post, and insert a Quote into the edit by clicking the usual "Insert Quotes" button on the bottom of the page. it wasn't always convenient as that button wasn't below your post edit textbox, but it's still better than the alternative that you now have to do.
which is adding the quote to a new post, changing to the simple text editor, then copying the whole quote including the [ quote ] brackets of course, and then pasting it into the post you're editing.
another issue on this site is that some mobile keyboards produce weird errors like adding multiple lines in-between the text.
I think that was an issue with either the Samsung keyboard or the Microsoft keyboard.
ever since the last big update, I can't remember when it was, many things are either worse or wonky.
for example, when I'm on my phone, and I want to upload an image, I sometimes can't click directly on the "+ Image" button on the bottom left, but instead have to click slightly to the left of it for it to work.
this is reproduceable on multiple browsers too.
then, before the big update you could edit a post, and insert a Quote into the edit by clicking the usual "Insert Quotes" button on the bottom of the page. it wasn't always convenient as that button wasn't below your post edit textbox, but it's still better than the alternative that you now have to do.
which is adding the quote to a new post, changing to the simple text editor, then copying the whole quote including the [ quote ] brackets of course, and then pasting it into the post you're editing.
another issue on this site is that some mobile keyboards produce weird errors like adding multiple lines in-between the text.
I think that was an issue with either the Samsung keyboard or the Microsoft keyboard.
Last edited:
acidagfc
Member
As some who works in the tech support of an enterprise-level software - shit's on fire, yo.
New features are pushed into new realeases, while the old ones are only fixed when a really large client finds that a workaround is just not good enough.
I would love for our devs to stop adding new stuff for like a year and focus in fixing old bugs, but the business demands growth and therefore pushes new features halfbaked.
And this is in software that can cost millions to large customers.
TF do you expect for your 60 bucks entertainmebt?
New features are pushed into new realeases, while the old ones are only fixed when a really large client finds that a workaround is just not good enough.
I would love for our devs to stop adding new stuff for like a year and focus in fixing old bugs, but the business demands growth and therefore pushes new features halfbaked.
And this is in software that can cost millions to large customers.
TF do you expect for your 60 bucks entertainmebt?
Last edited:
IlGialloMondadori
Member
These fuckin shitheads. This article pisses me off.There's a blog post that made the rounds recently...
I’ve been employed in tech for years, but I’ve almost never worked - Emmanuel Maggiori
When Twitter fired half of its employees in 2022, and most tech giants followed suit, I wasn’t surprised. In fact, I think little will change for those companies. After being employed in the tech sector for years, I have come to the conclusion that most people in tech don’t work. I don’t mean we...
Big corporations have trouble getting things done. Too much bureaucracy and bloat. But they're capturing a big chunk of the talent in the industry thanks to superior compensation.
I’m in a government position, as a lead, coming off of being at an agency. The agency was the opposite, too much pressure end, but government is filled with these arseholes who don’t want to work.
I proudly have a decent body count of people I’ve managed to get out of the team and the organisation.
The author though, is at a place where everyone is doing everything wrong, and not actually thinking about the intent of the exercises and the goals, and clearly has a horrible manager.
Last edited:
Oh The Travesty
Banned
I'm a senior product manager and it's all true.
Sales sells shit that doesn't exist to customers who aren't all that interested, customer success throws feature requests over the wall to get customers off their backs and blame product or engineering for churn, product is told to talk to the market but then we get burned when we aren't touting new features constantly, oh and big customers are constantly threatening to cancel it we don't complete some big-ass list of features no one else wants.
So what happens? Product and engineering pull all nighters to build shit features quickly (with no staff for QA by the way) and everyone acts surprised when shit doesn't work.
It's all because the VC sets unrealistic goals. Don't ever become a Product Manager, kids: I've never made the bank they tell you you'll make and it's not worth the sacrifices.
Sales sells shit that doesn't exist to customers who aren't all that interested, customer success throws feature requests over the wall to get customers off their backs and blame product or engineering for churn, product is told to talk to the market but then we get burned when we aren't touting new features constantly, oh and big customers are constantly threatening to cancel it we don't complete some big-ass list of features no one else wants.
So what happens? Product and engineering pull all nighters to build shit features quickly (with no staff for QA by the way) and everyone acts surprised when shit doesn't work.
It's all because the VC sets unrealistic goals. Don't ever become a Product Manager, kids: I've never made the bank they tell you you'll make and it's not worth the sacrifices.
Nay
IlGialloMondadori
Member
I also agree with this.
MidGenRefresh
*Refreshes biennially
ironically this is true for this very forum as well.
ever since the last big update, I can't remember when it was, many things are either worse or wonky.
for example, when I'm on my phone, and I want to upload an image, I sometimes can't click directly on the "+ Image" button on the bottom left, but instead have to click slightly to the left of it for it to work.
this is reproduceable on multiple browsers too.
then, before the big update you could edit a post, and insert a Quote into the edit by clicking the usual "Insert Quotes" button on the bottom of the page. it wasn't always convenient as that button wasn't below your post edit textbox, but it's still better than the alternative that you now have to do.
which is adding the quote to a new post, changing to the simple text editor, then copying the whole quote including the [ quote ] brackets of course, and then pasting it into the post you're editing.
another issue on this site is that some mobile keyboards produce weird errors like adding multiple lines in-between the text.
I think that was an issue with either the Samsung keyboard or the Microsoft keyboard.
A quick look into dev tools reveals that the hit box for the file input element is smaller than the div element that serves as the UI element / button.
It's really amateurish. Why use div as fake button? You can't even focus on that element. You can’t tab to it. This is basic stuff.
Last edited:
Ronin_7
Member
Writing software is hard.
I write alot of software alone, team is small we work with some very big clients & many times I'm doing work for two of them.
C#, T-SQL, VB etc.
It's a mess to get everything talking correctly across the board & make new features work, alone many times and with pressure to close the tickets
Not surprised everything is fucked beyond repair elsewhere, mine still running great so far
I write alot of software alone, team is small we work with some very big clients & many times I'm doing work for two of them.
C#, T-SQL, VB etc.
It's a mess to get everything talking correctly across the board & make new features work, alone many times and with pressure to close the tickets
Not surprised everything is fucked beyond repair elsewhere, mine still running great so far
Johnny Concrete
Member
He’s a brilliant programmer and incredible game dev, but he overcomplicates everything and loves to do so.
I’ve watched him taking days to implement a new feature in his own game engine that’s the most basic thing in any other prefab engine (like support for colored point lights or a particle system).
And that engine is not just his custom engine, but also made in his own programming language. (Jai)
He’s working on a pretty simple puzzle game and he’s taking his time. Just fucking around and streaming or playing Tarkov or whatever.
If he would’ve used Unity or Unreal he could’ve shipped 10x more games, but like he said: those engines are designed to fit for any game, not just his game. So he makes everything from scratch and it is watertight under the hood, but noone actually cares about that except for Jon Blow himself.
He’s a weird dude, but I respect him.
IlGialloMondadori
Member
He’s a quintessential dev in a lot of ways. “Behold! The magnificent engineering behind this feature!!” And no one wants the feature or cares, but we do know you wasted a year on it and that just burned fuck loads of money for something that will suck money to maintain and no one will buy.
YeulEmeralda
Member
Shortage of developers so standards get lowered.
If you were coding in the 1970s you were trained at MIT or Caltech.
If you were coding in the 1970s you were trained at MIT or Caltech.
Sentenza
Member
Even assuming this will happen anytime soon, it remains a danger to a degree.
While this would quickly start to revert the "efficiency" problem on the short term, getting more and more used to automated system will probably lead to an even-quicker loss of expertise on the human side.