- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
- cross-posted to:
- [email protected]
- [email protected]
You must log in or register to comment.
I still think PWAs are a good idea instead of needing to download an app on your phone for every website. Like, for example, PWAs can easilly replace most banking apps, which are already just PWAs with added tracking.
If you’re not using Notepad, I don’t even know what to tell you.
(let me preach a little, I have to listen to my boss gushing about AI every meeting)
Compare AI tools: now vs 3 years ago. All those 2022 “Prompt engineer” courses are totally useless in 2025.
Extrapolate into the future and realize, that you’re not losing anything valuable by not learning AI tools today. The whole point of them is they don’t require any proficiency. It “just works”.
Instead focus on what makes you a good developer: understanding how things work, which solution is good for what problem, centering your divs.
I’m skeptical of author’s credibility and vision of the future, if he has not even reached blink tag technology in his progress.
Good thing I hate web development
Remember when “The Cloud” was going to put everyone in IT out of a job?
Many of our customers store their backups in our “cloud storage solution”.
I think they’d be rather less impressed to see the cloud is in fact a jumble of PCs scattered all around our office.
I don’t think it was supposed to replace everyone in IT, but every company had system administrators or IT administrators that would work with physical servers and now there are gone. You can say that the new SRE are their replacement, but it’s a different set of skills, more similar to SDE than to system administrators.
And some companies (like mine) just have their SDEs do the SRE job as well. Apparently it incentivizes us to write more stable code or something
Yeah, AI is going to put some people out of work, but in turn will open lots of more specialized positions. And these positions that are lost could adapt to AI (for example, being part of the training instead of just being let go).
There is still difference.
Cloud was FOR the IT people. Machine learning is for predicting patterns following data.
Maybe stock predictors will adapt or replace but average programmer didn’t have to switch to replit because it’s “cloud IDE”
I mean, isn’t that what “get on or get left behind” means?
It does not necessarily mean you’ll lose your job. Nor does “get on” mean you have to become a specialist on it.
The post picks specifically on things that didn’t catch on (or that only catched on for a period of time but were eventually superseeded), but does not apply it to other successful technologies.
Yeah, I realized it suffers from (inverse) survivorship bias, only pointing out the ones that didn’t survive.
Didn’t one company claim something like “the internet is a fad” or “touchscreen phones are a fad” and went bankrupt/became irrelevant because they didn’t adapt?
touchscreen phones are a fad
Blackberry? I was like 10 at the time so this is based off my memory of who had what phone but that seems like the right guess
Yep, I didn’t remember well so I didn’t know for certain.
it’s funny, but also holy moly do I not trust a “sign in with github” button
Might I ask why? There are some pages where I see that as the least evil option, I.e. duckdns
Basically because my Github account has an important job, and I don’t want to increase its attack surface by using it as a pseudo-Facebook
This technology solves every development problem we have had. I can teach you how with my $5000 course.
Yes, I would like to book the $5000 Silverlight course, please.
10/10. No notes.
As an old fart you can’t imagine how often I heard or read that.
Yeah but it’s different this time!
I do wonder about inventions that actually changed the world or the way people do things, and if there is a noticeable pattern that distinguishes them from inventions that came and went and got lost to history, or that did get adopted but do not have mass adoption. Hindsight is 20/20, but we live in the present and have to make our guesses about what will succeed and what will fail, and it would be nice to have better guesses.
I do wonder about inventions that actually changed the world or the way people do things, and if there is a noticeable pattern that distinguishes them from inventions that came and went and got lost to history,
Cool thought experiment.
Comparing the first iPhone with the release of BlockChain is a pretty solid way to consider the differences.
We all knew that modern phones were going to be huge. We didn’t need tech bros to tell us to trust them about it. The usefulness was obvious.
After I got my first iPhone, I learned a new thing I could do with it - by word-of-mouth - pretty much every week for the first year.
Even so, Google supposedly under-estimated the demand for the first Android phones by almost a factor of 10x.
BlockChain works fine, but it’s not changing my daily routine every week.
AI is somewhere in between. I do frequently learn something new and cool that AI can do for me, from a peer. It’s not as impactful as my first pocket computer phone, but it’s still useful.
Even with the iPhone release, I was told “learn iPhone programming or I won’t have a job.” I actually did not learn iPhone programming, and I do still have a job. But I did need to learn some things about making code run on phones.
Quality work will always need human craftsmanship
I’d wager that most revolutionary technologies are either those that expand human knowledge and understanding, and (to a lesser extent) those that increase replicability (like assembly lines)
It’s tricky, because there’s no hard definition for what it means to “change the world”, either. To me, it brings to mind technologies like the Internet, the telephone, aviation, or the steam engine. In those cases, it seems like the common thread is to enable us to do something that simply wasn’t possible before, and is also reliably useful.
To me, AI fails on both those points. It doesn’t really enable us to do anything new. We already had chat bots, we already had Photoshop, we already had search algorithms and auto complete. It can do some of those things a lot more quickly than older technologies, but until they solve the hallucination problems it doesn’t seem reliable enough to be consistently useful.
These things make it come off more as a potential incremental improvement that is still too early in it’s infancy, than as something truly revolutionary.
Well it’ll change the world by consuming a shit ton of electricity and using even more precious water to fill the data centres. So changing the world is correct in that regard.
I think AI will definitively have an impact in how shit is done, but propably not the way AI bros think. It might not revolutionize the world, but become and standard.
I don’t know enough about AI or about the entire IT world so I cannot 100% affirm or deny anything, though.
You should click the link.
Hehe. Damn, absolutely fell for it. Nice 😂
I’d love to read a list of those instances/claims/tech
I imagine one of them was low-code/no-code?
/edit: I see such a list is what the posted link is about.
I’m surprised there’s not low-code/no-code in that list.
You’re right. It belongs on the list.
I was told several times that my programming career was ending, when the first low-code/no-code platforms released.
At my work we explored a low-code platform. It was not low on code at all. Beyond the simplest demos you had to code everything in javascript, but in a convoluted, intransparend, undocumented environment with a horrendous editing UI. Of course their marketing was something different than that.
That was not the early days of low-code mind you. It was rather recently; maybe three or four years ago.
“We’re gonna make a fully functioning e-commerce website with only this WYSIWYG site builder. See? No need to hire any devs!”
Several months later…
“Well that was a complete waste of time.”
Had to click through to change my downvote to an upvote, lol.
Non of those examples are relevant.
Those examples are specific tools or specific implementation pattern, AI in development is a tool.
It doesn’t dictate how to write software or what the written code will look like, it’s a tool that speeds up your code wiring. It catches typos and silly bugs that take hours to debug, it’s able to generate useful unit tests, it can clean up and apply my code style way better than codemaid or resharper ever code, it’s taken care of so much tedious shit and made software development fun again.
Vibe coding is not the future of development. If you aren’t learning to use AI as a tool in development, you are going to be left behind.
It’s more apt to compare it to IDEs. Sure, you can still write you entire app in vim and compile it in the terminal, but you would have been very foolish to deny the future of development was in IDEs.
None of those examples are relevant.
They seem pretty relevant. Those things didn’t go away, but they also didn’t remove the need for programmers (the way their sales people said they would).
Pretty much everyone I work with uses vim, emacs, sublime, or vscode. I like IDEs and use them for… well Java, but I wouldn’t argue that they’ve made the other tools obsolete or you’re a fool for sticking with the old ones. If it ain’t broke and all that. It actually seems like more people are moving back to pluggable text editors over IDEs
I’ve used AI tools a bit. They’ve really helped drop in code that would previously just be a bunch of TODOs; they get you up and writing the core parts much faster to see if the idea even works. They’ve also really helped answer specific questions or lead me towards the answer. They’ve also straight up lied to me quite a bit. It’s a weird tool.
I think the OP image is pretty wrong with the comparison it makes. LLMs/AI are a class of technology that are most definitely not going anywhere unless something dramatic happens. Some people, myself included, feel uneasy about the way they’re created and the fact that people in powerful positions completely misunderstand them, and I think that leads to the hope that they’re just a fad.
You’re describing exactly how all these web tools worked. “HTML, CSS, and JS are too hard to do manually. Here’s a shiny new tool that abstracts all that away and lets you get right to making your site!” Except they all added additional headaches, security concerns, and failed to fill in edge cases, so you still need to know how to do all that HTML, CSS, and JS anyway. That’s exactly how LLM generated code works now. It’ll be useful and common for a while and then the technical debt will pile up and pile up and eventually everyone will look around and think “what the hell were we thinking” and tear it all down.
I left 10 years ago, web development is shit.
glorified autocomplete
I use it to discuss the pros and cons of potential refactorings, then laugh as it botches the implementation.
Which is honestly its best use case. That and occasionally asking it to generate a one-liner for a library call I don’t feel like looking up. Any significant generation tends to go off the rails fast.
I’ve been using it to write unit tests, I still need to edit them to mock out some things and change a bit of logic here and there, but it saves me probably 50-75% of the time it used to take, just from not having to hand-write all that code.
Getting it to format documentation for you seems to work a treat. Nothing too complex, just “move this bit here, split that into points”.
You sir haven’t railed an entire ui out of your vibes up asshole
I use it to find easy to miss errors.
I don’t remember progressive web apps having anywhere near the level of fanfare as the other things on this list, and as someone that has built several pwas I feel their usefulness is undervalued.
More apps in the app store should be pwas instead.
Otherwise this list is great and I love it.
Thanks for summing it up so succinctly. As an aging dev, I’ve seen quite a lot of tech come and go. I wish more people interested in technology would spend more time learning the basics and the history of things.
