Everytime I hear that AI will replace someone I want to ask a question:
Okay, if AI can replace engineer with their Manager, what is stopping replacing manager with their managers and so on until CTO? or if we go with a different direction, AI replacing engineers with PMs, but then PM can be replaced by Solution Architects or Sales people, go even further customer can just create a meeting with AI agent, explain their needs and you don't need PM/SA/Engineers
Lets go even further instead of someone in the company explaining to AI, what if AI explains to another AI their company needs?
It'd be nice to have a company with only CTO-level engineers, but no one can afford that or even find enough workers at a certain scale, regardless of pay.
It makes sense that with AI, you can have architects who haven't written code in 5 years produce acceptable code, but I don't know many people high up the chain who'd say they have the time or desire for that.
Until your level's backlog is empty, you'll always find something better to do than the tasks of your lower-level colleagues, and it'll never become empty.
> It'd be nice to have a company with only CTO-level engineers, but no one can afford that
The point I was trying to make is that, if AI is accurate for Engineering work, why do we think its not accurate for PM job, if it is accurate for PM job, then it should be accurate for others as well.
Subsequently, it makes agent swarms accurate.
So you will have 1 CEO talking and creating the product, then expose another channel to customers where customer agents talk to the company agent.
Problem is, AI is not accurate and problems accumulate, this is why you need engineers, same applies to PMs, if you solely rely on AI writing product docs, mistakes accumulate and your engineers will build totally different product
Sometimes I wonder if what will actually happen, is that we will have very small startups, essentially a C-Suite but with actual coding skills and domain knowledge, who build new companies using AI that end up gaining an advantage over the incumbents and force them out of business. Indirectly you're replaced by AI. I could see the drasticity of the changes to culture and workflow that AI demands being too much for most legacy companies to handle. For instance, there are still a shockingly large number of companies relying on seriously dated software and paper based systems.
The logical conclusion I've come to is that the world will be divided into two types of people in the future: entrepreneurs with an army of AI employees, and the unemployed. Presumably those entrepreneurs are mainly just selling to other entrepreneurs, since the unemployed don't really have any resources to buy their products and services.
There are some critical parts of architecture where sometimes I really do need to see the code and even sometimes put a wall around it and tell the agent they can't touch it.
VSCode is open source and ahead, and getting lots of contributions from different companies.
On the other hand, you have JetBrains with a specific expertise in JVM based dev environments, it's possible to compete with them, but very time consuming
They better focus on one thing and win the developers, otherwise they would lose (and losing) to Claude Code and Codex on one side, on the other side they will lose to JetBrains and VSCode
I would love to hear from people using both (Claude Code OR Codex) AND (Qwen) and their experience with Qwen models, are they on par, or how far are they?
I switch between Claude Code (Opus/Sonnet) and Qwen (OpenCode, OpenClaw) multiple times throughout the day and Qwen 3.5 is really nice. I do also use KimiK2.5 and GLM5 pretty often too and I'm starting to get a sense that the agent tool is becoming a little more important than the model with these level of models. As long as tool calling and prompt quality is all configured correctly by the provider.
What are the reasons for switching? Personally I got into the habit of doing a bit of a round robin with Codex/Claude (CLI) and then DeepSeek and Qwen web chat. And Claude in web chat. I like to switch just to learn the differences, otherwise I'd never know what the other models can do. But I still feel attached to Opus, but this can be fammillarity. If I only had Qwen maybe it would be effectively identical at the end of the day. Hard to say.
Not sure if I understand it correctly, are you saying:
1. western countries bomb civilians, kill them, put them in jail without court, have ethnonationalistic racist state where some races has more rights and others have less, steal land from others, bomb neighbours because someone is hiding there, ignite wars, lobby/bribe powerful country politicians to reach their own goals
or
2. are you saying Israel didn't commit any of this?
> Not sure if I understand it correctly, are you saying: 1. western countries bomb civilians, kill them, put them in jail without court, have ethnonationalistic racist state where some races has more rights and others have less, steal land from others, bomb neighbours because someone is hiding there, ignite wars, lobby/bribe powerful country politicians to reach their own goals
Sir, have you read about Western countries' imperial and colonial past, even over the last century alone? What about just the last 2 years, as they stood by Israel in every meaningful way while from time to time 'expressing concern' and issuing statements that 'international law must be respected' as the hypocrites that they are? The original commenter was correct: Israel fits right in.
I understand that appealing to myths of noble intentions of western populations is ultimately a good thing if it gets them to act more like it, but a part of me can't resist pointing out that it's just a myth and it's never been anything other than 'might makes right'. I agree with your goal, just please don't frame it as if western countries are these beacons of morality when they're anything but.
They were not framing it that way. They were proposing a retort to someone else that suggested Israel is a civilized western country.
The person you are responding to was saying that for that to be true (Israel = civilized western nation) that either it is civilized to do all those awful things or that Israel is not doing those things.
Obviously, both are false. So you are responding to someone who agrees with you all the way.
Israel doesn't target civilicans specifically, but they don't really care about coladeral damage. i don't see any problem with this
what do you mean "put in jail without court"? give me examples
whaat is the problem with having an ethnonationalistic racist state? and also, arabs have the same rights as jews in israel, because israel is a civilised western country where the law has power.
>lobby/bribe powerful country politicians to reach their own goals
yes, they do this. and who is to blame? you, who elected the said politicians, and allowed it to happen, or israel, that utilized its power to achieve its goals?
i don't support israel lobbying, and i wish it didn't happen, but everyone is so easyly fooled, and it is so obvious, that we can no longer say it's israels fault. it's the west who has to do something about it.
> 2. are you saying Israel didn't commit any of this?
some of the things they didn't comming, some things that did commit and it is not a problem as you present it, and some things they did comming, which indeed as a problem. but there's no perfect state.
i hate israel, but definitely not because it bombs hamas terrorists.
This might not be 100% technical content, but the work, visualizations are technical.
So many people upvoted because they have empathy to both types of content, and downvotes to this type of content comes most of the time from bots controlled by IDF
Which countries? Negative submissions about China and Russia get flagged near-instantly. Frequently also about the USA. People don't like a topic - they flag it.
Being "technology" doesn’t make something interesting. A writeup of the author about their work would have been interesting, but they haven’t even published the code nor written anything about it.
Okay, if AI can replace engineer with their Manager, what is stopping replacing manager with their managers and so on until CTO? or if we go with a different direction, AI replacing engineers with PMs, but then PM can be replaced by Solution Architects or Sales people, go even further customer can just create a meeting with AI agent, explain their needs and you don't need PM/SA/Engineers
Lets go even further instead of someone in the company explaining to AI, what if AI explains to another AI their company needs?
reply