Will Artificial Intelligence Take Away Developer Jobs? 

You are welcome.

I think this is not correct, in fact it is exactly the opposite, chatgpt increases the risk of putting wrong code into the codebase. It is correct to say that it increases the writing speed of the software, but it is incorrect to say that it 'make things safer'. A classic example was shown by Tim himself about the use of the Random object in another video.

@@federicodibernardo2719 fair enough your analogy is right, but what I meant is we could use ChatGPT as a tool to limit other potential risks that may occur while programming.

I definitely think ChatGPT is a good tool or helper.

ChatGPT is more like the Tesla autopilot. It can seem impressive but shouldn't really be trusted and require constant intervention. The work environment is like city driving. I think that might be a better analogy.

True, taxes took away the jobs and sent them to Asia.

Pretty much

Change is inevitable. How developers do their jobs may change because of this tool, but that's always been the case.

They are taking over already...

@@IAmTimCorey i agree, im at the stage where im starting to build a portfolio, so im not quitting now! :) thanks for the vids, these have helped me out a lot, there isnt a lot of c# youtubers either!

That _might_ be the case if software development was a stagnant or shrinking field. It is not. In fact, everything is moving towards more software development, not less. That's why the humble lightbulb is now WiFi-enabled, why your local pizza place has an app, and why cars are being held up from manufacturing not because of the "regular" parts but because of their CPUs not being availablel

@@IAmTimCorey yes that's a great point, almost all processes require digitalization nowadays and more work is indeed needed while this happens. Let's just hope business models wont change in an aggressive way with monopolies like Azure and AWS offering software as a service tailored for every single domain, powered by painfully advanced AI and killing all competition. It's the worse case scenario and hopefully it will not be that simple for such a scenario to happen.

True

Thanks!

You are welcome.

Thanks for the suggestion. Please add it to the list on the suggestion site so others can vote on it as well: suggestions.iamtimcorey.com/

Thanks for sharing.

Ha!

@@IAmTimCorey I will say. You had a scary point… Companys may drop there employee count from 10 to 5 and pair with Ai software. Employment is already competitive. Can you make a vid on this topic?

You are welcome.

Thank you!

You are welcome.

Nice!

Really I found it terrible for stories

I think this is mostly true. It is an impressive system, and I think it has worked its way up the ranks a bit more than that, but it is definitely just a tool.

You are welcome.

Thanks!

I think that will be part of the job. It will still be a "regular" job (software developer, marketing, etc.) but this tool will be used to enhance the position.

lol yeah, it isn't perfect.

I hope you get feeling better.

Thank you!

@@IAmTimCorey most welcome!

Exactly , it won't take much time like your son's generation....I will definitely believe more 3-5 years that's it software engineers have to look side ways for a living. Google -total employees -50, Microsoft - Total employees-10...etc....

You are welcome.

That's a nice use-case.

I agree that it will cause change. That's inevitable. Change always happens. That's the constant. I do think it will make us more efficient, although not as much as people think.

@@IAmTimCorey I think the hype is bigger than the bite to be honest, it's a great route but people have been milking the 'replace job' for a long time now. And I think Programming may just be one of the fields that increase in demand despite AI advancements.

Thanks for sharing.

No you wont! When other companies embrace AI solutions they will become more efficient, which means they will reduce man power and make products cheaper. You won't be able to compete with them and you will have to do the same. It's basics of demand and supply economics.

Yes, because companies only ever have a finite amount of work to do and never have aspirations of doing more. That's why when computers came about, companies got smaller since one person with a computer could do what dozens of people with paper spreadsheets could do. Wait, no, companies got bigger and hired massive staffs to use computers.

That's usually true for developers. Our job is constantly changing as technology changes.

@@IAmTimCorey Indeed! Exactly why I think the good devs will be best equipped to learn, adapt, and take advantage of AI. Most have been doing it their whole career in tech and see it as opportunity vs. threat. Not many other fields require that mindset and adaptability to change

Glad it was helpful!

Thank you!

That's a good thought. There are some things that fully replace others, but they are a lot rarer than you think. Paper books still exist. Local TV is still a thing. Even records and turntables are still a thing.

AI is like any tool - it helps developer be better at what they do. You are right, soon developers who don't use AI won't be as productive as those who do.

Embrace AI tools and learn to use them well. They will make you a faster and better developer if you adapt and grow with them. Learn how to use them while not allowing them to dictate what your code should be (since they can write really bad code). Do that and you will be even more in demand as a developer.

You are welcome.

You are welcome.

We've had systems like this for years. Granted, not this advanced, but this is not new technology, just similar technology at a larger scale. While an increased scale does give it an increased apparent intelligence, the reality is that this system is about the equivalent of an intern. I don't know of any companies that love to have interns that don't advance. They put up with the mistakes and slowdowns that interns bring in order to reap the benefits of them progressing past that point. ChatGPT won't really progress past that point. Either it doesn't retain, which is what it does now, or it learns and gets the wrong lessons. For instance, I saw a chat today where a person convinced ChatGPT that 5 +10 = 25. After telling it once that 25 was the result, ChatGPT would then defend that position multiple times. Microsoft created a bot years ago that was a learning bot. They pulled it off the Internet, shelved the project, and vowed to never use the code again because of how badly corrupted it became in just a very short amount of time. ChatGPT is an excellent tool and a big leap forward in terms of what a tool can do. It is not, however, a suitable replacement for an actual, thinking, growing human.

@@IAmTimCorey While I agree that right now it is very limited despite being a huge leap compared to what came before, I still think that the rate of improvement is only gonna get faster. I'm sure it won't replace all devs, but it's gonna make getting an entry level job increasingly harder super fast.

@@IAmTimCorey but the fact is how an automobile industry replaced 1000's of employees with one huge machine.....I hardly find 50 people in that automobile industry .....so same is the case with us...only experts stay along with AI...rest all are unemployed....please tell me.....I am getting worst headache

AI will definitely shift jobs around, as any new technology does.

The understanding of "why" is really important, as is context. Where a senior developer will say "it depends" to a question, an AI will give you an answer. That's not a good thing. The "it depends" is true - there are a LOT of factors that go into the answer.

@@IAmTimCorey That's a really good way of putting it.

What clients? I'll open up ChatGPT, tell it that I need an amazing 3D graphic maker software and it will create it for me. There'll be no software companies, no one will pay for software.

@@unclechaelsneckvein lol. yes, spot on, that's exactly what the future holds for the world. lol.

@@dloman77 Unfortunately yes.

lol, clear requirements. I can't wait until the first time I get those. I've been waiting over two decades.

Yep, good comparison.

Further back into the dawn of computers it was assemblers replacing working out machine code by hand and then compilers replacing assemblers. I remember checking the assembler produced by early embedded compilers to find gross inefficiencies much like I check what ChatGPT produces. The compilers improved to the point they were usable as long as you avoided certain language constructs (I still see else if chains instead of switch statements "because it’s more efficient"!) until now we are used to writing pretty much anything and relying on the compiler optimising it better than most humans could ever do - or importantly, in most cases ever *want* to do. We’ve moved on to another higher level of abstraction (what Tim calls "logic") and left the computer/compiler to do the grunt work of doing the lower level bits and bytes, better than we could and often in ways we’d struggle to follow.

It's not "just another tool in the arsenal". This is paradigm changing technology. If you don't understand what it means than you will learn in 5-10 years when 99% of code produced in the world will be done by AI and 80% of coding jobs wiped out.

@@SimpMcSimpy I agree to the point that a lot of number of tasks will have automatic code generation. This will change the way that anyone programs. But the tasks will also be more complicated too, and you will build many higher level components. Wiping out devs is an overstatement. Mostly newbies are worried right now, because the AI 'competes' at their level . Obviously the AI code will dramatically improve too in terms of quality. This is about adaption and I think that devs must adapt to the new conditions.

You can succeed at whichever path you go. AI isn't going to take your job. However, you should learn how to use AI effectively to make yourself a better developer.

I'm not sure how long you've been in the industry, but this isn't the first time we've heard claims like this. In fact, that was the claim of the personal computer. Businesses would use them to replace workers entirely. Whole industries would be erased and people would be out of work. Instead, we got LOTS of jobs driving computers. In fact, lots of jobs today entail using a computer. We went through this when the Internet became a mainstream option. People were going to outsource all the jobs to cheaper countries. Some companies went all in on that idea and fired all of their US-based staff to outsource everything to offshore groups. However, a LOT of companies didn't do that. Even those who did figured out it wasn't the solution they thought it was. I know of a lot of companies that ended up hiring back all of their US-based developers AND keeping their offshore developers. I even worked at a company that did that. The development staff INCREASED in the US even though they started offshoring. No-code development was going to revolutionize the industry. "Regular" people could use no-code solutions to create their own application, thus eliminating the need for developers. That didn't happen either even though no-code solutions are more popular than ever. ChatGPT is just another tool. While it is a big leap forward in what computers can do and it is amazing in how it works, if you really understand what it does, it isn't that scary. It isn't going to be able to do what developers do. Throwing bigger training pools at it will make it better as a tool, but it won't get it closer to doing what a developer does.

Machine learning is pretty important to all of the "AI" work being done (since that is really just the result of machine learning). As far as how many jobs, what types of jobs, etc. will be there, I couldn't answer that. I don't focus on the ML side of things.

It's always "the next version". That's the thing - the next version is never the solution. It just keeps pushing things down the road. These claims of "complete automation" are just silly. Twenty years ago, we had claims of the paperless office. That didn't exactly happen. We did get better tools and nice features, but paper is still very much a thing in about 99% of offices. Work-from-home was another one - soon we won't need offices. That's another one that isn't happening like it was predicted. Yes, some people can work from home (my company is entirely work-from-home), but offices still exist and there are real benefits to having them. In fact, I only hire people in my local area because we still get together in person monthly. The bold claims of what technology can do in the future never really turn out the way they were predicted.

@@IAmTimCorey Well, yes, it takes time but it is going in that direction. Paperless office? Real thing in very many cases already. You can just chose paperless bank statement updates. Paperless utility bills etc. Some people who prefer a more conventional way prefer paper still, but those people are being gradually replaced by a new "paperless" generation. Personally I hate mailboxes. We do not need them any more. We just witnessed that a work-from-home is very much possible and preferred by employees during lockdowns. Corporate managers who want to control my time and life want me in their office but many devs now switch jobs for the ones who allow them to work from home. I know several people who decided not to ever go back to offices after lockdowns were canceled. They found new jobs and they are free now. You seem to prefer the old ways but technology dictates a new approach where people are less needed to reduce cost of production/maintenance etc. You have not noticed that? Recently every surgery needed real human surgeon, today we have robots doing some specific operations over our bodies. Recently You needed a dev to scrape some info from websites or documents, today we have software that can do it. Recently we needed a police office on a bike to monitor traffic, today we have a motorbike gyroscope that is self driven and monitors traffic without a human sitting on it. And we can continue. I understand that teaching C# is your business right now and you have to convince people they need your product. But you should consider time we live in and be flexible as we all have to be now. Thank you.

Thanks!

I think we are going to see a boom and then a decline in AI as it gets adopted and then starts to eat its own tail.

@@eye776 you need to see a therapist.

_Software development is a thinking skill not a typing skill._ - well put.

Nope. That is an incorrect assumption based upon the premise that writing syntax is what a developer does. That is not true. A developer's job is to use syntax to write logic. AI creates syntax for us to use (and not typically great syntax on the first go). It will always need a person to create the logic. Besides, the field of software development isn't stagnant or shrinking. It is growing like crazy. That's why the humble lightbulb is now WiFi-enabled, why your local pizza place has an app, and why cars are being held up from manufacturing not because of the "regular" parts but because of their CPUs not being availablel

@@IAmTimCorey I think and also personally made the experience, that the thesis: "It will always need a person to create the logic" is wrong. Around 25 years ago I started to write a GO (board game) engine and improved the engine and also my playing strength gradually. Implying both will asymptomatic approach some medium-high level in my live time. But I really got shocked by DeepMinds Alpha Go 2015/2016 playing that far ahead, coming from zero in such a short time. From that high level they improved it even much higher within one or two years. Absolute no expert was expecting it. It was amazing but also changed the Go community dramatically. E.g. it destroyed a big part of the Go Teaching market, when you do not need to pay for the analysis of your games. Also pretty similar are the fast improvements in machine translation and speech recognition. This will also cost the job of many professionals in this area. I think, we Software Engineers are to ignorant and proud, when we think the mass of us will also be needed in 5, 10 or 15 years.

Creating a computer that can play a board game is not anywhere near the same as getting it to interact in the real world. A board game has clearly defined, specific, and limited rules. Life has none of those. We live in an analog world. Think about it. Pick out anything in nature and identify its color. Like its very specific color. Then look at it again and identify how much of it is that exact color. The answer is practically none of it. Everything has variations, gradients, and flaws. Nature doesn't really do straight lines, solid colors, constant sounds, or pure substances. Yet computers deal in just the opposite. Everything is a 1 or a 0. I know this sounds abstract, but it is important to understand this. If you can clearly define the rules (all of them), you can get a computer to play inside of those rules. However, when you try to get a computer to work outside of those rules, it fails. This is how hackers work. They circumvent systems by violating the "rules" of the system. It takes creativity to do so. That isn't something a computer has. ChatGPT has not created anything. Nothing. It has taken what others have created and recombined it. It learned a set of rules based upon how we acted and then it tried to do something inside those rules. For example, ask it to write you a poem about something. At first, it will be really impressive. However, once you start actually looking at what it says, you will see that it is nonsensical. The reason why is because it knew to fit inside the rules of a poem, but it did not know how to actually create something of meaning inside of those rules. It cannot evaluate if its own poem is "good" or not. It can only evaluate if it followed the rules. That is why software developers will be fine. We use our creativity to define systems. We identify new ways of doing things based upon our experiences and the requirements for the project (which are always different even in very similar projects). By the way, here is a haiku about dolphins for example, created by ChatGPT: Graceful dolphins play Splashing in the ocean's waves Nature's beauty stays That looks cool, but what does it mean? Line 3 is just non-sensical (but it fits within the "rules").

@@IAmTimCorey Thanks for your detailed answer. Of course Go is just a board game, but it was for centuries the Holy Grail for AI science. It seemed one of the most difficult artificial problem of mankind, and considered unsolvable, because brute force (like in chess) was no option, because the immense search tree size. I think the Turing-Test already got pretty interesting having ChatGPT involved. In 1985 I was already able to fool my teachers by automatic written poems on a Commodore 64. When they've being told the origin of the poems they got emotional overwhelmed and started crying. But back to the topic. I would bet, that we will have much less jobs in Software Engineering in 10-15 years than we have today. Happy Christmas!

That's not nearly as simple as it sounds. In 2015, Elon Musk said we would have self-driving cars in 2018. We still don't have them. Yes, we have assistive modes and even some modes that can handle simple driving. However, it is INCREDIBLY complex to make a self-driving vehicle. The number of edge cases and problems to handle are enormous (dark, rain, snow, weird intersections, drivers who don't act rationally, pets, downed trees, dirt roads, construction zones, accidents, emergency vehicles, washed out roads, etc.) So why am I bringing this up? Because driving is essentially 2D and inside of a mostly closed system. We have roads, lines, "simple" rules, and defined tasks to accomplish. Yet, for all of this relative simplicity, we still haven't figured out how to make it work. Now look at software development in general. There are more inputs to consider, little or no defined rules, world-wide scope, regulatory complexities, and lots more to consider. AI is not going to take over our job of creating logic. However, it will definitely assist us in implementing that logic.

@@IAmTimCorey I see, I thought you meant that when the gap is filled, Ai would accomplish having logic

@@IAmTimCorey I wanted to ask another question, once something new comes and my previous knowledge becomes obsolete and I have to learn something new to keep having a job; from your experience, how hard is it to grasp new technologies? I've heard someone else say that you never really start from square one all over again, is this true?

It definitely can be. The key is to really go deep into one language. The reason has nothing to do with syntax. The reason is because when you actually use a language, you practice your logic. The more you practice and refine your logic, the better you will be as a developer. Then, when you switch languages, the logic skills you learned will translate to that new language. If you just mainly learned the syntax of a language, almost nothing will translate and you will have to start over.

@@IAmTimCorey what about other concepts other than just switching languages? like changing from a worker on yachts to being a flight attendant, like your example, wouldn't that mean I have to completely change occupations and learn completely new skills? or does switching become easier due to my experience in another field? I am new to this and only now am I thinking of going into the programming occupation

AI use machine learning. It has no creativity, it can't create completely new things, it has to build on what someone else has created thousands of times

@@celex7038 Nonetheless, what chatGPT is able to do, is really impressive. I'm starting to use it daily to write boring and simple parts of code. It's true that it can just reply to a query in a pseudo-intelligent manner, and consistentily give good answers, but i had to admit that a great part of a programming job is searching for code snippets that respond to programming task needs, and this tool is helping my productivity a lot. Much better than a google or stack exchange searches.

AI can't directly replace creative jobs. Software can't be creative. It can copy, it can imitate, but it cannot be creative. Software development is about creativity. Using logic to accomplish a task. That isn't something that can be replicated with AI.

AI will always need developers to drive it. It isn't self-aware.

Once they embrace it they will increase productivity 1000%. That means project that required 10 devs will need 1 or 2. New jobs will be cut 80-90%.

Or maybe a project that would take 2 years to complete now with ai you could finish it in let's say 6 months and then companies will start to innovate more and more, for example we have in our backlog work for at least 2 or 3 years and new tickets are created every day, with ai maybe we could cut in half that queue, but the work never ends

It has existed for 20+ years. It hasn't had a negative impact yet. People keep telling me that "this time is different", but they've been wrong every time. The issue comes down to what developers do. They don't write code. Writing code is how they do their job, not their job itself. Their job is to create logic. The tools for doing so have been rapidly improving year after year for decades. That has provided more opportunities. It has not reduced the demand for developers. Today, I can create a full web application that talks to a database and have it deployed to the web in less than one workday. 20 years ago, it would have taken much longer. Yet we have more demand for developers today than we did back then.

@@IAmTimCorey Thanks a lot

That is true.

@ghost mall "because each engineer will be capable of significantly more velocity". Does that mean more job to be done? Or less people required?

Like @ghostmall2421 said, when have companies ever decided that a set amount of work was enough and that they shouldn't do any more? They will want developers to use those cost savings to do even more things even faster. I'm not sure if you have ever worked in a moderately-sized development shop, but the todo list is usually years long and it only gets longer. That's why shops don't upgrade to the latest version of .NET - it takes away from the new features that the executives want and it takes away from the bug fixes that have to be done. Developers don't typically have the time to do "nice to have" work. They are too busy with their hair on fire trying to get everything done that they can in the shortest amount of time.

@ghost mall I understand your point. We'll see if the equlibrium of dev productivity and business demand remains the same. I beleive it won't as AI will develop way faster than us. You beleive the opposite. We'll see.

@@LE8271 I'm 14, I was so excited to learn programming but this system of AI made me afraid if i'm wasting my time

AI looks amazing and can do some amazing things. However, it isn't replacing humans. It is making them more effective at their jobs, though. In a way, that will eliminate some positions but it will also create others. You can't just let an AI run loose on its own. It needs someone to guide it. Otherwise, you get really bad results rather quickly. Also, once AI starts eating its own tail, it is going to be harder and harder to make AI better, not worse.

@@IAmTimCorey ok but the problem is - one can get into classical software development without degree via few month bootcamp. AI development is for top best scientists mostly, at least as far as I know it is not something as easy to do as traditional coding and at least masters degree will be a bare minimum

We've seen this before (Basic, VB, etc.) where "normal" people could become programmers. It never eliminates or even reduces software development jobs. Building logic is the tricky part, not writing syntax.

This is an amazing technology and an amazing advancement in AI. But this isn't magic. Don't treat it like magic. Actually understand what it does. It has learned to parrot back to us what it most commonly sees as an answer to a problem based upon how it has seen us solve that problem. It didn't actually create a solution, it used our solutions and mashed them together until it got what appears to be a valid solution. A lot of times it is. However, there are two problems with the "AI is going to take all of our jobs"-type theories. First, AI learns from humans. If humans don't create things, the AI won't have anything to learn from. Even worse, and I'm including this in the same problem, the AI will start to learn from itself. That's the snake eating its own tail. If we assume that 10% of all answers are confidently incorrect (and that's a low number), when it starts to learn from itself, it will self-reinforce those incorrect numbers, making the percentage go up. Remember, it isn't creating. It is amalgamating content. It isn't in a lab trying things out, inventing new ideas. It is just giving us back the ideas we already had. That will poison the well, endangering the very concept of this AI. The second issue is that this AI doesn't do what developers do. Developers don't write syntax. That isn't their job. Their job is to use syntax to create logic. That's why developers can change languages. This AI doesn't create that logic. It creates syntax. So no matter how much syntax it creates, it won't replace developers. If syntax alone could replace developers than we would have had a decreasing number of developers every time a higher-level language came out. Microsoft's Power Platform should basically eliminate developers, right? Only there are actually jobs out there for people to be Power Platform developers (software developers who use a different syntax).

lol, true.

I am willing to bet you haven't tried chatGPT yet.

Um, I'm agreeing with them and I've used it extensively.

@@SimpMcSimpy You are correct, but I am aware of what it is, and watched many vids on it. And while there is no doubt it displays the illusion of intelligence, I haven't seen it attempt imagination. I believe there is a reason for this, which is programming languages have documentation, imagination does not. It would be foolhardy to suggest such tech could not emulate imagination at some point in the future, but I don't believe that day is even visible on the horizon.

At first, yep.

I'm not sure what you mean.

Nope.

Exactly.

That's a good approach.

Thanks for sharing!

I can't help but chuckle when I read these kinds of comments. But hey, if telling yourself this makes you feel better, go for it. Google AI guy resigning because of the dangers of AI, IBM stops hiring to replace jobs with AI, and the wave will just keep growing. Never in history have academics, scientists and entrepreneurs have asked for a "time-out" when it comes to developing a new technology. ChatGPT doesn't even have one year of being released and is only growing up exponentially. And AI is a totally different monster, you can't just compare it to "how computers didn't take everyone's job". There's no denying what's coming.

@tonybp - There is no doubt that AI will do a lot of great things for us. However, it isn't going to eliminate jobs. It may change what types of jobs are available, but it isn't going to just eliminate them. In fact, have you noticed how many new jobs and even new companies AI has created? TONS! Yes, companies are making big predictions and even making changes in staffing because of AI (so they say), but that isn't what it seems. First, companies don't know what to expect yet. No one does. Second, the tools aren't there for businesses to really rely on AI as a replacement for a human in any capacity. Third, companies are laying off all over the place. They are using any excuse they can get their hands on. The real issue is that companies over-hired during the pandemic and now they think they can trim staff without consequences. My guess is that this trend won't last more than a couple of years. As for the "never in history" comment, that's not true. Atomic research, the Internet, and more all had smart people asking to pause. However, that's not how the world works. And yes, those technologies also radically changed the world. And yes, technically they eliminated jobs. Nuclear power eliminated coal miners jobs (I used to live in an area that was reliant on coal mining). The Internet put LOTS of small businesses out of business (Amazon alone did a lot of that). However, with both of these, they also created LOTS of new opportunities. How many peoples' jobs are now possible solely because of the Internet? I just hired a person from Kyrgyzstan to do some artwork for me. That would not be possible without the Internet. AI is the same way. If your job can be done by an AI, yes, it will probably be eliminated. For instance, captions for videos are excellent with AI. That means I probably don't need to pay for a service to do it for me. However, that also means I can provide captions for more of my content. That means more opportunity for more people. It also means I'll probably be able to afford to pay someone to translate my captions into other languages. That means more people get hired.

@@IAmTimCorey "However, it isn't going to eliminate jobs." IBM just put hiring on hold while they plan to elminate 7,800 jobs and replace them with AI. "have you noticed how many new jobs and even new companies AI has created? TONS!". This is reaching, not even that close to the amount of jobs that are going to be lost, estimated at 300 million withing the next 5 years. "the tools aren't there for businesses to really rely on AI as a replacement for a human in any capacity." Google, Apple, Microsoft, are starting to do the same thing as IBM. Atomic research and the internet originated in the military complex, not commercial industry. Amazon destroyed a lot of businesses and jobs, most of the jobs Amazon created are terrible and with bad pay. "AI is the same way" this claim is really out there. "Captions for videos". Very soon all the avg Joe and Jane will have to do is tell AI what they want, "I want a video that lasts this amount of time, that advertises my product/service which is this, use this style, use this kind of music, do the copy,m use the voice of Morgan Freeman, use the face of this person or mine and so on. oh and do the captions in several languages too". Same thing with websites or apps, "build me a website with these many pages, do the copy for the blog and post every week, do the SEO, chatobots, etc". On the other hand, I understand why you have to think and say all this. It's what you do, it's your thing, you have to defend it and be optimistic. I'm more of a realist and I think people should be prepared for what's coming and not take AI lightly because it is a serious issue. Good luck everybody.

I'm guessing that 300 million jobs estimate is world-wide, since the US doesn't even have 300 million workers. Those estimates are just guesses in the dark, though. They also don't take into account job creation. We can quibble all day about the jobs created and lost, but the root issue is this: Is AI smart enough to do the job of a human? The answer is mostly no. It can absolutely do certain tasks, and certain low-level jobs are just those tasks so those jobs will be eliminated. However, there is an amazing complexity to the human brain. Our brains do things that the best AI can't come close to yet. A simple example is self-driving vehicles. We've been told for years that they are just around the corner. They aren't. We have cars that say they can self-drive, but they almost hit people, they can't navigate construction zones, they can't handle snowy roads, they can't handle dirt roads, etc. Basically, they can do the "happy path" - the "normal" situations. As developers, we know that is the simplest of the issues. The complexity comes from the unknown or unexpected. AI doesn't think for itself. It just crunches lots of data to predict an outcome. That's not the same thing.

Only for the companies that make foolish decisions already.

I would recommend doing deeper research into AI. AI is not like our brains. That would be AGI and it is only a theory at this point. As for GPT-5, there isn’t a timeframe on that. Part of the reason is that they are doing research on 4 to better understand it. Part of it is because they’ve found that more inputs does not mean smarter AI. That’s a problem because that’s how we’ve been making better AI so far. I would encourage you to actually use AI daily for about a month. At that point, you will better understand it’s limited nature.

Highly doubtful that we would get there. We have not yet created even a spark of that with our most advanced AIs.

Agreed.

ChatGPT is best at new code portions of most common programming languages.

There isn't a direct translation, which is why it is struggling. But you are uncovering exactly the issue - it needs guidance and a discerning eye to understand what to do.

@@IAmTimCorey Where can I find a good guide for accomplishing this task?

At least for developers, yep.

Can you please give me some predictions for the kind of jobs that AI will create? It's not the same as the horse to car analogy this time. Very very different outlook.

Hmmm… are you human, or AI?🤔😉

@@niax782 Just a worried dev.

AI need data to learn. If there will be no software companies, who will make a code which the AI ​​will use for learning? No software deweloper means no improvment in AI becouse of lack of new data

@@celex7038 I think at this point there is more than enough data. The invenzions people would make in software development the AI will make easily.

@@unclechaelsneckvein If people stop writing software, AI will not be able to create anything new, it will only build on things that have been created before. There will be no new technologies, nothing better will be created.

AI already programs itself. It is a learning algorithm. We've had that for years. That's why even the developers don't understand the RU-vid algorithm or the Twitter algorithm or the Google search algorithm. They have given it guidelines, but it figures things out itself. That isn't really new.

@@IAmTimCorey Yeah, but that's not really what I'm talking about. No biggie tho, it was meant more of a joke than anything else.

AI is not and will not replace our brains. It cannot think for itself and it gets things wrong a lot. Newer versions won’t think for themselves either, even if they are more accurate. It is relatively easy to get something that looks like it will replace our brains (the 80%) but that last 20% is practically impossible. That’s why self driving cars are kind of working but still very dangerous (and a LONG way from being ready). If everything was neat and orderly, they would be working great. However, that’s not life. Snow happens. Kids run into the road. Animals cross the road. Intersections aren’t always clear four-way stops. And that’s for a relatively simple application like driving, where there are defined rules that a 16-year-old can grasp. Application development is infinitely more complex in that the situations are endless. While a human can work and study to handle their given situation, an AI would need to handle all of them. That’s not going to happen anytime soon. Not even close.

​@@IAmTimCorey It may take a while yes, but impossible to replace our brain? This AI is just the first iteration, it will grow exponentially. And you still didn't address the blind spot most IT professionals are not seeing. Imagine a ToDo app like Todoist, creating the database, the interface and all structure. Yes, you can code it 10 times faster with AI. But simply that app won't need to be made anymore. Just tell the AI, "add to buy the milk to my shopping list", "set urgent tag", "remind me when I'm at 10min from Walmart or until the end of the week". And it will work much better, more flexible and with lot more features that any app created with code. And THAT'S your blind spot.

@@IAmTimCorey About the self driving cars, that's another topic. But I also disagree, I think it will happen soon. The AI don't need to be perfect, it just need to be much safer than a human driver. Tesla engineering is far ahead over everyone else, with a large dataset and training models. I believe they will solve this soon, and again, technology evolves exponentially.

lol

So say we all.

So say we all.

Nope. That is an incorrect assumption based upon the premise that writing syntax is what a developer does. That is not true. A developer's job is to use syntax to write logic. Writing logic is tricky, takes a lot of learned skill, and is not something AI is capable of doing.