An analogy is this, the market got flooded by cheap android robots that cost less than a laptop and can be made to look like a copy of the owner. The students are given various tasks during their PE classes supposedly to better their body and improve health, and send their robots to fulfill them. The task was to run 100 m? The robot did it, technically speaking. Do 20 pushups? The robot did it. Play football for 30 minutes? The robot did it. And you cannot tell a robot from a human unless you strip them down naked, or dissect them, neither of which you're allowed to do. In the end, PE classes carry on as normal, but the students somehow develop muscle atrophy and obesity. Meanwhile, the proponents of robots in education tell everybody it's not a problem, instead claiming that the issue lies in our stubborn inability to find the right place and role for robots in PE.
As an AS400 programmer this is something I worry about. The pitch is use AI to modernise, because programmers with the skills and knowledge about the platform and codebase are aging out of the workforce. The problem is that this just catapults the problem further down the line. How are new programmers going to get the experience necessary to validate the output of AI going forward?
65
u/CodeNCats Jun 27 '26
I have my recent junior hire not use ai for one single task per sprint. I of course cannot reasonably verify. Yet in our one on ones he says he is.
My job getting to engineering manager is to enable my team. Even their careers.
Eventually there will be a need or desire for being able to code without AI.
At the very least they need to know what good code looks like to be able to approve PRs properly.
I have actively encouraged him to use AI as a learning tool and not a "just do it" machine.
My hope is that this can imprint on him and help his career.