zlacker

>>martin+(OP)
I'd argue 2 types of users are

* People using it as a tool, aware of its limitations and treating it basically as intern/boring task executor (whether its some code boilerplate, or pooping out/shortening some corporate email), or as tool to give themselves summary of topic they can then bite into deeper.

* People outsourcing thinking and entire skillset to it - they usually have very little clue in the topic, are interested only in results, and are not interested in knowing more about the topic or honing their skills in the topic

The second group is one that thinks talking to a chatbot will replace senior developer

>>Punchy+xO
> The second group is one that thinks talking to a chatbot will replace senior developer

Once they realize that it doesn't replace senior but can easily replace junior, junior dev will have a bigger problem and the industry at large will have a huge problem in 8 years because the concept of "senior" would have vanished.

>>whynot+0I1
Why would the concept of senior disappear in 8 years? I am a senior, and work with seniors that have been seniors for 20 years. In 8 years we will still be seniors.

>>hxuguf+Xf2
My perspective is that each year a good chunk of senior dev leave the pure dev to go to management roles or something else and while they do that, they are replaced by junior morphing into senior.

I consider 8 years to be the real experience to be considered a senior dev.

If from now on, the amount of junior is drastically reduced, this will lead to a lack of senior in 8 years because the senior leaving should be the same proportion.

In a situation where they replace juniors with agents, yes, we'll still be senior, but just like people capable of setting a VHS recorder, our number will dwindle.

>>whynot+tr2
I understand. At my work nobody senior becomes a manager so I never had that perspective. Thanks for clarifying your thoughts for me.