Programmer Humor

32042 readers

1369 users here now

Post funny things about programming here! (Or just rant about your favourite programming language.)

Rules:

Posts must be relevant to programming, programmers, or computer science.
No NSFW content.
Jokes must be in good taste. No hate speech, bigotry, etc.

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

[email protected]

159

question, When were programmers supposed to be obsolete? (poliverso.org)

submitted 2 weeks ago by [email protected] to c/[email protected]

60 comments fedilink hide all child comments

Hi, this is a question that popped into my mind when i saw an article about some AWS engineer talking about ai assistants taking over the job of programmers, this reminded me that it's not the first time that something like this was said.

My software engineering teacher once told me that a few years ago people believed graphical tools like enterprise architect would make it so that a single engineer could just draw a pretty UML diagram and generate 90% of the project without touching any code,
And further back COBOL was supposed to replace programmers by letting accountants write their own programs.

Now i'm curious, were there many other technologies that were supposedly going to replace programmers that you remember?

i hope someone that's been around much more than me knows something more or has some funny stories to share

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] [email protected] 17 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (2 children)

sometimes, it feels like managers hate engineers, and are constantly plotting their replacement. maybe its because it hurts their ego to know that the engineers they manage worked harder to get there and deserve a higher salary.

or else, it could be office politics. anyone who can claim to have removed an entire department from payroll is due a huge raise.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I don't think it's just managers saying hey we could automate such and such a thing away. It's human nature to think "how could I improve this" which almost immediately leads to "if I get this right it could mean no work at all"

[–] [email protected] 5 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

that explains why the idea to replace engineers would enter peoples minds, but not why they would try so, so hard to get people to believe it.

[–] [email protected] 7 points 2 weeks ago

Every business's biggest expense is labor. Skilled labor costs more. The people in charge like it when you save money.

I think it's wrong. But only because the interests of the people who own the machines and businesses diverge from the worker's interests. I'd like to see more worker cooperatives. If the workers own the machines, then it's good when things are automated.

I also don't believe anything will ever be truly automated, or that it's a good idea to try.

All that to say we don't have to resort to an explanation of "managers must hate engineers" to understand why they would want to eliminate positions.

[–] [email protected] 6 points 2 weeks ago

sometimes, it feels like managers hate engineers

They hate engineers because the engineers ask difficult questions that somebody needs to answer in order to really automate a process, and they take the time necessary to do so.