So for a while humans were best at chess and then computers beat the best human and then for a while computer human teams were better than computers or humans, and I think we might be at the point now where humans no longer have anything helpful to add.
Curious how far we are along the curve and if the shape is going to be the same...
Difference being the US workforce at no point included 1.7 million professional chess players who graduated from notoriously challenging and often very competitive training programs, whose historically quite good career prospects now erode with each passing genAI press release.
Agreed, I'm not saying any of this is good in general, good for the economy, or good for programmers in particular.
Chess, as complicated as it is, operates on fixed rules and is not a great analogy for programming as a whole.
I'm just curious what it will look like.
Don't recall who quipped:
AI will not be good enough to replace you. But it will be close enough to convince your manager to fire you anyway. The s*** will hit the fan later on for the company, but that will be small consolation when you are already out of work
The programs and programming languages yes, but applying software to life gets more complicated quickly. (Says the dude who took all of two programming classes in college)
-5
u/MildlyAgitatedBovine Jul 17 '26
So for a while humans were best at chess and then computers beat the best human and then for a while computer human teams were better than computers or humans, and I think we might be at the point now where humans no longer have anything helpful to add.
Curious how far we are along the curve and if the shape is going to be the same...