Weren't we supposed to be replaced by AI by now? Or at least work less? AI agents were supposed to take over the world. So when exactly is that going to happen, and why are we still working so much?
Because we can't pretend that nothing has changed. Even at my workplace, where data security is valued above pretty much everything else, we're already using AI coding agents. Which, in my opinion, means they're basically everywhere by now.
Simple features practically write themselves, and even debugging, including in legacy applications, has become significantly easier.
And we're only at the beginning of this revolution!
What Happens When AI Can Do Everything?
A friend and colleague of mine recently encouraged me to write an article about how to get into AI before it's too late. After all, someone will have to build this revolution, right?
Soon, applications will practically write themselves. AI will even be sitting in your toilet, politely suggesting that it's time to get up before you give yourself hemorrhoids. xD So what should we do to avoid being pushed out of the job market?
Since I know a thing or two about AI agents, and I've been in this industry for quite a while, I started researching what the next few years might look like. And the longer I researched, the more pessimistic I became. Because sure, right now we have huge conferences dedicated to AI agents. We're trying to build them properly, make them secure, reliable, and so on.
But what happens in a few years, when we've solved those problems too, and an agent can spin up ten sub-agents of its own from a single prompt? Where exactly will developers fit into that picture?
(Okay, for now I still get the impression that hardly anyone even knows what tool calling or WebMCP is. 😅 But maybe that's just a matter of time?)
There's One Problem With Replacing Everyone...
Okay, but there's a catch in this whole theory. Sometimes, when I hear people talking about how "AI is going to replace all of us," I feel like we're forgetting something pretty important. If a massive company can be run by just a handful of people thanks to AI, and most of the population ends up unemployed, who exactly are those companies going to sell their products to? People need to earn money to buy things, after all!
Now, let's throw all restraint out the window and go full science fiction. Imagine it's 2031. Autonomous AI agents do practically everything. Humans are left with manual jobs, like plumbers or hairdressers.
But even those people have hardly any customers, because everyone else is unemployed and desperately cutting back on unnecessary expenses.
The economy starts collapsing. People start protesting. So what do governments do? To prevent a full-blown revolt and keep themselves in power, they start introducing laws designed to bring humans back into the workforce.
Or Maybe We Could Finally Work Less?
Maybe in five or ten years, software engineering won't be a job for people who actually know how to program or understand the technology. Maybe it'll be something literally anyone can do.
But perhaps we should take this idea even further. Instead of throwing people out of their jobs, why not take advantage of how productive AI agents are and let people work part-time for the same salary Maybe we could work three days instead of five, and spend the rest of our time doing whatever we want: relaxing, learning new things, developing ourselves?
Oh, what a beautiful vision! Just imagine how many articles I could write. I'd finally get enough sleep. I might even find time to deal with that enormous pile of clothes sitting in my wardrobe, which currently has approximately zero priority in my life! 🤯
But there's just one tiny problem with this wonderful vision. Where is all that free time we've been promised since the invention of the steam engine? Because I'm certainly not working less!
AI Makes Us More Productive. So Why Are We Working More?
Quite the opposite, actually. I feel like I'm working more and more, and expectations keep growing, because "AI will help you with that." And yes, some of the actual coding, the part so many of us genuinely enjoyed, has already been partially automated.
But what about everything else? The coordination, the endless meetings, the constant effort to make sure the entire project doesn't fall apart?
Don't you get the impression that because it seems like we should be able to deliver more, that's exactly what we keep trying to do? And somehow, it doesn't always work out the way we expected?
I also feel like AI adoption in companies is still in its infancy, even if everyone already has a paid subscription to a coding agent. Someone still needs to think about the architecture. Someone needs to figure out how to automate the agent's work in the first place.
Yes, I keep hearing about entire workflows handled by "armies of agents." But aren't those mostly greenfield projects? Because I have a feeling that legacy applications still play by their own rules.
And the good old biological human is still the bottleneck... Or maybe we're not the bottleneck at all? 😉
And What About Junior Developers?
And yes, it's hard to disagree that junior developers have it tough right now. Partly because of AI, absolutely. But not only because of AI.
Ten years ago, the demand for developers was so enormous that companies would hire practically anyone who could write export class. Some companies even organized their own bootcamps to train future employees.
But those days were already coming to an end before AI arrived. People realized that IT offered a relatively easy and comfortable way to make good money, so more and more people entered the industry, and the market simply became saturated.
AI just hammered the final nail into the coffin.
So... What's the Plan?
And now I'm genuinely curious what you think. I really don't want this article to be one of those "look how brilliant Sylwia is, she has figured out the entire future of software engineering" pieces. Because I haven't! I genuinely don't know.
How do you see the future of our industry? Are we all going to end up unemployed? Will entirely new engineering professions emerge, jobs we can't even imagine today?
Or maybe, and this is my personal dream, civilization will finally manage to do something that actually benefits human beings, and we'll end up with a three-day workweek?
I'd really love to hear your thoughts!
BTW, check out this video! Who is that absolutely gorgeous person on the thumbnail? If I'm ever forced to create a Tinder profile, I'm definitely using that picture. Inside the video, though, it's just regular Sylwia talking about application migration like she always does. So if you're interested, feel free to give it a watch! ☺️
And if you enjoy my content, you can also follow me on LinkedIn!
Top comments (66)
Great thoughts!
My view is that the AI bubble hasn't burst yet. Using AI is still relatively cheap, and I suspect a lot of the real cost is being subsidized. Once we have to pay the full price, we'll see how much we actually use it every day.
But AI has already changed how we work, and I do think we'll need fewer people in our industry. What worries me is what happens when the bubble bursts and a lot of startups built around cheap AI APIs start crashing. But that's just my prediction.
There are three things I'm more confident about.
First, even the best agents, like Fable, Argon, and Astra, deliver impressive results, but I doubt they're affordable enough to replace developers at scale. So we end up using cheaper, less capable agents that still need human supervision.
Second, I get mad at AI agents almost every day. 🤣 They make wrong assumptions, add unnecessary code, or turn simple features into something much more complex than necessary. Someone still has to review and fix all of that.
Third, security. Even my small experiments have shown how easily AI agents can be tricked, and sometimes it doesn't take much effort at all. (And I already have another article ready about tricking AI agents through WebMCP. 😁)
So yes, I think OpenAI and Anthropic are overselling the idea of AI replacing developers. The compute needed to do that reliably at scale would be extremely expensive, and you'd still need experienced people to supervise those agents.
But I wouldn't complain about a three-day workweek! Although, considering Altman's recent comments about RAM, I'm starting to wonder if the plan is to replace developers or just take all the RAM from our PCs first. 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Hahahaha, I literally ask my friends every day if they've already sent their RAM to Altman! 🤣🤣
But yes, I agree! The bubble might burst, agents still need supervision, and I imagine people working in cybersecurity are having the time of their lives right now. There's no way we're handing all of that over to machines anytime soon. And the amount of dependencies LLM-generated code can introduce... well... 😅
Who knows what the future will bring, though? Assuming Altman doesn't steal everyone's RAM first, I think we'll see more and more people moving toward local models, and that's going to be really interesting too!
And by the way, now I'm officially offended that you don't want to travel to conferences with me! Another fantastic talk about WebMCP vulnerabilities is going to waste! Think about it! KubeCon is already a lost opportunity, but imagine how perfect this would be for AGNTCon in London next September! Pure gold!
C'mon, Sylwia, don't be mad at me. Now I feel guilty. 😢
I told you I couldn't make it to KubeCon, mainly because I didn't have enough time and had family responsibilities, but also because I have literally zero experience speaking at conferences and I'm not confident enough yet. And now AGNTCon in London? You're really not going to let me hide behind my keyboard, are you? 🤣
But seriously, I appreciate your confidence in my experiments. Maybe one day you'll convince me to actually get on stage. Let's just hope Skynet doesn't take over before then. 😅
Hahahaha, well, if you change your mind, just let me know! London isn't until September, so there's still plenty of time!
The plan is that there is no plan, Sylwia! I don't know if this is indeed a bubble that gonna pop or if a bubble it doesn't exist. The money calculations show the first, but only the future will tell us. The debt is there regardless, and it's not only debt in money but also debt in skills and intellect.
some observations/thoughts over the past 2 years:
There are some good things happening though: unbearable consultants extinction, i'm out of panic attacks when everyone is telling me that i would become obselete, the new found skill of identifying slop and ai gold diggers. Win is a win.
Hahaha, there's definitely something to that! :D I actually wrote an article once asking, "If we had today's AI ten years ago, would we still be coding in PHP?"
And you can already see AI influencing the evolution of frameworks. Take Angular, for example, moving from two major releases a year to one, partly to give LLMs more time to catch up with the framework's syntax. It's quite funny when you think about it. Instead of technology adapting to us, we're starting to adapt technology to AI. 😂
And yes, I don't really see that massive wave of innovation everyone keeps promising either. We're generating more code, more apps, more wrappers, but are we actually building anything fundamentally new?
That said, I do think AI has made everyday coding significantly easier. A lot of the repetitive implementation work can already be automated, and frankly, I'd been bored with that part of software development for years anyway! :D
So I definitely see real value in the technology. I'm just not convinced that faster code generation automatically translates into better software, more innovation, or happier developers.
Not on my toilets, for sure 🤣
Joke apart, I don't think AI is going to replace us. You've touched the aspect of economy already. If everyone is unemployed, no one pays, so it won't happen.
But there's more:
How are we going to solve the energy requirement needed for all those GPUs? Actually replacing human brains from work needs 1000x more energy than what we produce now. Actual hardware required to produce energy (whether it's solar panels or turbines) requires a lots and lots of work, and time consuming too. There's no indication that we are even close to solving that.
Serious software like OS, Banking, Medical etc. will always require human engineers. Even if AI can do that perfectly, we'll mandate humans in those positions. For our security from AI take over. We'll do it. Rest assured. Our governments may be run by idiots, but they surely don't act like idiots when their power is threatened. So, that won't happen.
Software Engineers will become AI + Software engineers. Normal humans will do cute stuff like small games, web pages, personal tools etc. Any software that require long term maintenance, will need humans. Again, if nothing else, then for our own safety. Besides, 99% of world population don't have tech savvy brains to maintain software that needs long term support. Because of AI, they'll become even less tech savvy. Even for simple decision making, we'll need software engineers.
Our work will become more, not less. Previously it was just software, now it's software + AI. And because AI is making it easier, we'll get paid less unless we are very good at both AI and software engineering. The ones in the bottom 99% will work more because they'll get paid less. The ones in the top 1% will work more to remain in the top 1%.
Software security will be a nightmare. Previously it was against human hackers, in future it'll be human hackers combined with AI, and millions of Rogue AI agents combining against humans and other AI agents. So, normal people will never be able to battle that. If anything, we'll need more IT people.
My Prediction: every job can be replaced because of AI with the only exception of really good Software Engineers (who are also AI engineers). Computer Science will go down for a while, then come back like never before.
🥰🥰🥰
P.S. I'll keep covering this topic in my AI slop series. Please bookmark it if you're interested:
Preserving human agency against tech monopolies
Use it, or lose it 🧠
Hmm, I think you might be onto something with the idea that we'll end up working more, not less. Unfortunately, I can totally see that happening... 😅
And as for security, just look at those guys already! They're busier than ever, and I doubt things are going to get any easier for them.
The energy argument is also quite convincing to me. Actually, now that I think about it, pretty much every good sci-fi story has to figure out how to solve the energy problem first!
I am slightly worried about AI getting soooo expensive that only the people who can afford it can build software that's up to the standards.
That was a massive possibility, but not anymore (because of Chinese Open Weight models).
So we have China to thank for that. Don't worry. 🙏🏼🥰
Yeah, that's what @unitbuilds told me too!
This is exactly what’s been on my mind for a while too. I usually put it like this: Is it worth setting humanity aside on the altar of endless technological progress? My answer is obviously NO. I say that even though I’ve clearly been caught up in the flow myself. The scary part isn’t even that agents can code, among other things. Some people still reassure themselves that all they do is statistically predict the next word. The situation is more alarming than that. Patterns have formed inside these models by filtering through humanity’s written knowledge, and for a few months now, these models have even been consciously seeing.
But this period is both a curse and a blessing. To me, it feels like a gold rush that will last a very short time, when everyone can run toward their goals. The question is: what are those goals for each of us? Is there anything we can personally do in this situation? Obviously, we can’t stop the tech giants, and perhaps we don’t even want to. Instead, we floor the accelerator and enjoy the wind in our hair as we race toward the cliff.
I say we should appreciate our legacy work, because a badly functioning system gives far more people work than a well-functioning one. Let’s keep struggling and sharpening our skills through work. Now that an agent does our work for us, we have time to develop other abilities too, and to care for the people we love. I feel this applies equally to old hands and beginners. Of course, beginners are at a disadvantage. Unfortunately, they have very little time, and less and less of it, to understand themselves and build some kind of defense mechanism. They need to learn quickly how to process information critically, because I’m saying nothing new when I point out that the media has been constantly trying to steer us for decades.
Finally, it’s no coincidence that I wrote out an 80,000-character role-playing session. I put my own answer in there, in my usual indirect way.
Wow, 80,000 characters! That's practically a short story already! And yes, I especially agree with what you said about beginners. It also makes me think about education and schools in general. We now have instant access to pretty much any information we want, but the question is how we use it.
You can blindly copy an answer without understanding a single word, or you can ask an LLM to explain something to you, over and over again, in different ways, until you actually understand it. And that's exactly where the problem lies.
Because in the right hands, AI is an incredible accelerator for learning and personal development. Unfortunately, I'm afraid that for many people, it'll become little more than a machine that provides ready-made answers, gradually replacing the need to think for themselves.
And if that happens, critical thinking will suffer even more. People will become even less likely to question what they see on TV... What do you think?
I haven’t watched TV in a very long time, and I wouldn’t really recommend it to anyone. Whenever I watch a film, my “what is the author trying to say?” sensor kicks in immediately. Take Odysseus, for example, which got plenty of criticism for being historically inaccurate. Why was Helen of Troy played by a Black actress? Why did his fleet consist of just three ships? Why did the ships look like Viking ships? Why did they sail west at the end, following the sun? Why does the Greek king look like Batman and Darth Vader rolled into one?
The film itself gives us a clue by repeatedly bringing up the Sea Peoples as the threat of the time. But the deeper answer lies in the way our history education has been steered. At least here in Hungary, the Greeks of Homer’s time and the Greeks of Odysseus’s time were neatly blended together, as if there had been a continuous transition. Yet the events of the Trojan War are dated to 1184 BC, and not long afterward, the entire Bronze Age civilization collapsed. The Greeks lost their knowledge of Linear B and couldn’t read or write for centuries. Homer then composed his works around 725–675 BC, when writing had returned and society had reorganized into city-states.
On top of this, there’s the theory that the work isn’t just about the Trojan War as passed down through legends, but also about a Bronze Age voyage during which the early Greeks may have discovered the American continent. In this reading, there were three ships because they symbolize Columbus’s three ships, and they looked like Viking ships because the Vikings were the first to discover America.
Anyway, here’s a video if anyone is interested in the topic… Sorry for wandering so far off track, but I don’t always stay within IT, and I wouldn’t recommend that to anyone either.
I think you've touched on two problems that don't get nearly enough attention in these discussions: where the productivity gains actually go, and how we develop the next generation of engineers.
I've spent a good portion of my career in developer education, and the junior developer question concerns me. If AI takes over much of the routine implementation work, we may remove some of the experiences through which people traditionally learned to recognize bad assumptions, understand existing systems, and develop engineering judgment. We still need experienced engineers to review and verify what agents produce, but where does that experience come from if we're no longer giving people opportunities to acquire it?
There's also an interesting distinction between generating more software and delivering more useful software. I've been experimenting quite a bit with AI-generated code and its verification lately, and one recurring observation is that making implementation faster doesn't necessarily make establishing correctness any easier. Sometimes it just moves the bottleneck. We can generate more code than ever, but someone still needs to establish whether it solves the right problem and behaves correctly.
And your point about working less really resonates. We've been promised that technology would give us more leisure time for generations, yet increased productivity so often becomes increased expectations instead. A three-day workweek sounds wonderful, but I suspect that's ultimately an organizational and economic decision rather than a technological one.
Maybe the question isn't just what AI will allow us to do, but what we'll choose to do with the time and productivity it creates. And whether we'll make room for the people who still need to learn the craft along the way.
This is such a thought-provoking comment! Thank you for sharing your perspective!
You know what just occurred to me while reading your thoughts about junior developers? What if, at some point, we end up moving toward a completely different model of entering the profession?
Maybe in the future, companies won't be willing to hire people who simply claim they can code or have a few projects in their portfolios. Instead, we might end up requiring some kind of formal qualifications, certifications, university degrees, or supervised training, similar to professions like architecture.
Because if AI can generate an impressive portfolio for practically anyone, and junior developers no longer get enough opportunities to learn through actual work, how else will we be able to verify that someone genuinely understands what they're doing?
Of course, certifications and degrees don't automatically make someone a good engineer either! And I wouldn't particularly love a future where talented self-taught developers are locked out of the industry. But it's an interesting thought experiment. Maybe the whole way we train and evaluate software engineers will have to change.
And as for the three-day workweek... well, I think we'd need an almost ridiculously optimistic scenario for that dream to become reality. 😅 Not just technological progress, but companies, governments, and society actually agreeing that the benefits of increased productivity should translate into more free time rather than simply more work.
Unfortunately, I'm not particularly confident that's going to happen. But I'd absolutely love to be proven wrong!
And I think your final point captures the whole dilemma perfectly. The technology might give us incredible opportunities, but what we actually do with them is an entirely different question. :)
That's an interesting thought experiment as well, and I suspect you're right that we'll need to rethink how people enter the profession. The portfolio question is particularly relevant. If an AI agent can generate an impressive application, complete with tests and documentation, what does that portfolio actually tell us about the person presenting it? Perhaps quite a lot, perhaps very little. The artifact alone no longer provides the evidence we might once have assumed it did.
I'm a little hesitant about moving toward formal credentials as the primary answer, though. Having spent years in developer education, I've encountered excellent self-taught developers and people with impressive credentials who struggled to apply what they'd learned. I'd hate to see us replace one imperfect signal of competence with another, particularly if it creates additional barriers for people entering the field.
I wonder whether something closer to an apprenticeship model might make sense. Give people opportunities to work on real systems under experienced supervision, evaluate how they investigate problems, make decisions, explain tradeoffs, and respond when something doesn't work. Those are much harder capabilities to demonstrate through a polished portfolio, and they're precisely the skills we'll need if AI continues taking on more implementation work.
Of course, that creates another problem: companies would have to be willing to invest in developing engineers rather than expecting everyone to arrive fully qualified. We may end up discovering that the biggest challenge isn't how to assess junior developers, but who is willing to help them become senior developers.
And yes, I'm afraid the three-day workweek may require considerably more optimism than either of us currently possesses! 😅 Technology can create the opportunity, but it can't make the decision for us.
"AI will do everything" is like "computers will do everything". If technological progress is so disruptive and inevitable, why are there still humans driving carbon-fuled trucks across the US? Why are people sitting at office desks in front of computer screens all day? And what about robotics when humanoid robots still fail to walk stairs carrying coffee cups?
I have just been trying out Claude Design + Claude Code to prototype a small web project. After a lot of babysitting the AI agent, and, admittedly, some useful inspiration and a lot of time saved on boilerplate configuration, I'm still happy to take back control after the prototyping phase. And I still prefer collaborating with experienced human UX/UI designers for good reasons.
Meanwhile, people keep walking around with clunky mobile phones that haven't changed much for ten years, wearing headphones, and driving around in cars and on bikes that haven't changed much in the last decade either. And while the IT industry has seen waves of layoffs even before "AI", or as you put it, "AI just hammered the final nail into the coffin," other industries desperately need skilled labor, including truck drivers, construction workers, child care, elderly care, medical care, just to name a few.
I doubt that "everyone will become unemployed" and poor and starving. Money is there, but it seems we need to convince the wealthy and powerful people what to spend it on.
I remember an AI expert explaining this robotics problem once. Basically, motor coordination and all those physical skills are the result of millions of years of evolution, while the prefrontal cortex, whose functions we're now trying to replicate with AI (and which some of us use more than others ;)), is a relatively recent evolutionary invention.
And as for all those professions with "care" in their names, I think there's another question worth asking: what percentage of the job market do they actually represent?
Because if (and I really mean IF!) entire sectors like law, accounting, and IT end up drastically reducing their workforces, I'm not sure the solution will be as simple as everyone suddenly becoming a truck driver or eldery care. 😅
I'm not saying mass unemployment is inevitable, but I do think the scale of potential disruption is something we shouldn't underestimate.
That's still a lot about choice and priorities.
Hypothetically, a new wave of anti-intellectual totalitarianism in the spirit of 20th century socialist or nazi regimes could abolish large parts of the current post-industrial itellectual job market, send some people to forced labor in farms and mines, and others to the military. Lots of low-paid jobs and no official unemployment anymore.
I used to work in a hospital as an assistant nurse in my youth to avoid otherwise mandatory military service. If payment and working conditions weren't notorioulsy bad, compared to creative and office work, I might have chosen a care career instead of staring at my screen getting angry about software errors.
Also hypothetically, we might even imagine an anti-AI-socialism banning computers, like in Dune and other science-fiction scenarios, where Patrick Stewart played a so-called mentat, an intellectual specilized on doing all the tasks that computers used to do before.
Disclaimer: this is all hypothetical, and I don't discuss politics at all in the development community. This is all strictly about AI and developer jobs in the future.
AI definitely makes us faster at some parts of development, but somehow that doesn’t seem to turn into more free time. Instead, expectations just keep rising because “AI can help with that.” 😹
I’m currently working on a Nuxt → React migration, and a lot of the actual coding can already be automated surprisingly well.
But the difficult part is still the judgment around it.
AI can write a lot of the code, but those decisions still require understanding the product, the history, and the people using it.
So I don’t think the human role disappears just because coding gets easier. It may shift more toward deciding what should exist in the first place, and what should intentionally stay the same.
My favorite future is still your three-day workweek version though. 🚀
If AI gives us more productivity, I’d really like some of that productivity to come back to humans as time.
Also, the thumbnail looks great, and you look great in the video too! 😸
That outfit is really stylish! 👗
Hahahaha, thank you so much! 😄 It was supposed to be a Hawaiian-themed day, and well, that's about as Hawaiian as we can get here in Poland! 🤣
And yes, you're absolutely right about the human context! I see exactly the same thing in my own application, especially since we're dealing with a very complex legal domain. There's so much history, business logic, and context behind certain decisions that simply generating code is nowhere near enough.
And of course, there are all the security concerns too... Although I do think AI will eventually catch up in that area. Or at least I hope so! 😅
I think the biggest question isn't whether AI will replace developers, but whether increased productivity will actually improve our lives.
There's a real risk that companies will turn every efficiency gain into higher expectations rather than shorter working hours. And for junior developers, there's another challenge: if AI does more of the actual coding, how will they get the experience needed to develop real engineering judgment? Maybe the real measure of AI's success shouldn't be how much work we can automate, but how much better it makes human life.
A three-day workweek would be a pretty meaningful start. 🙂
Oh yes, that's such a beautiful idea, and I absolutely love the thought of measuring AI's success by how much better our lives have become! But will that actually happen? Well, to be honest, I have my doubts. 😅 I'd absolutely love to be pleasantly surprised, though!
And I completely agree about junior developers. I think that's one of the biggest risks we're facing right now!
Never going to replace us in a 1000 years. The key to understanding the difference between an AI and LLM is to realize what the difference once was between 'the cloud' and 'the internet'. One refers to a communication technology and other is a narrative and sales pitch, something to build a story or hype on.
And narrative bubbles always have a very limited life. Be it the Tulip bulbs of 1600s or the dotcom boom of 1990s or the mortgage credit hype of 2000s, they always end with a profound market crash. It's difficult for us to realize that while we are inside the bubble though.
Looking at the never ending supply of VC funding that goes every day into these so called 'AI stocks', we feel it's something magical or magnanimous. But one day, I'm sure the Nasdaq counters will reflect the bare reality that it's just another technology like others that came before - and that day of realisation isn't very far.
I think I agree with you to some extent, but not entirely. :) Because we can already see that software development is changing, and LLMs and AI agents are genuinely capable of doing quite a lot. So I wouldn't dismiss the technology itself as just another marketing narrative.
That said, I absolutely agree about all those pseudo-AI startups riding the hype wave. I suspect many of them are heading for a pretty hard landing sooner rather than later. 😅
But I think there's an important distinction between an AI investment bubble bursting and the technology actually losing its value. The former seems quite plausible to me, while the latter... not so much!
Really interesting take! I’ve noticed the same thing, AI was supposed to make work lighter but somehow the to-do list just keeps getting longer . What worries me most is the effect on junior developers. Most seniors learned the fundamentals before AI, so they can spot when an agent gets something wrong. A lot of juniors are learning with AI from day one, so it’s harder to build that same understanding. I’m fully on board with the three-day workweek dream though, someone please make it happen🤞!
Exactly! It's honestly a little scary to think about what the future will look like for junior developers. Maybe we'll eventually end up with some kind of mandatory developer certifications, just to make sure people actually understand what they're doing!