Lumping6371

There's a lot of money injected into astroturfing and propaganda by big LLM in my opinion. I'm unsure who it is, specifically, but it is undeniable it's there; from reddit posts talking about how "I havent written code in 60 years" to "I have 30 YoE, FAANG experience, impeccable track record, and I can't get a job....Drumroll It's due to AI!".

Even here it can get pretty negative in the comments, in waves. I've noticed a lot of articles about LLMs, making wild claims about its reach tend to get a lot of pro-LLM, supportive comments at first and then on less generalizing, fear-mongering comments are added, arguing against LLMs or limiting their predictions of it.

I'm guessing a lot of people aren't necessarily technical, and fully believe the big-llm promises and make broad assumptions about our profession; that or they're bots.

"Programmers are obsolete, but like, for real this time guys!"

So only FAANG does engineering now? Pretty elitist take. Would you happen to have a FAANG company in your resume, by any chance?

Yes, non tech companies tend to care less about the technical end of things. They, we, "don't do engineering" in the sense of dealing with large scale systems, optimization, etc. Still have to understand the product, and translate business requirements into code and systems, often running with budget constraints. If that's not engineering, I don't know what is.

"Juan said his dad works at Nintendo"

I guess just status farming, or some sort of delusion about writing being a hindrance to conveying your ideas, much like with writing code.

Yeah, but it's very likely you won't be working like a mule, or creating a bicycle with three wheels. How could oneself be innovative and top talent under such conditions?

This is just the run of the mill politics you see at every big company (or mid sized one).

I worked at a PHP shop, it was pure mierda. Worst code I've ever seen in my life. Pure incompetency. Does that say anything about PHP shops as a whole?

What's skills? Pumping out code ala startup? Sounds like a stable environment. Someone with a good eye will still be able to pick out flaws in the processes/architecture and learn a thing or two.

"The main concern is having replaceable talent to reliably do X" as in every other company?

I swear you guys make having a regular job sound like being under slavery. It's just a job. Some companies are boring, that's just part of the job, and being able to adapt to different environments is what makes a good sde imo.

Good thing that at scale, private package repositories or even in-house development is done. Personally, I would argue that an engineer unable to tell apart perfect from good, isn't a very good engineer in my book, but some engineers are unable to make compromises.

And what's Ruby's maintainability like? As in, once the project gets inherited by a new dev, or your reach a larger than a couple of devs scale?

Not being ironic, genuinely curious. My only parallel is JavaScript and that becomes a pain in the ass quick due to the small bugs that go unnoticed, even working as a lone dev. TypeScript catches a great deal of those and you can get by with less testing and a more readable (imo) codebase, so a win-win for me.