I am 25 but as someone who came into this field very passionate and competent, this was my initial reaction and it sat uncomfortably with me for many months. I still have nostalgia (mainly from a younger age). On work feeling more honest, I think this is a result of an institutional attack on software engineering rather than a new reality of these tools. Like what happens to many other labor forces in history as you mention with artisan cobblers. In some ways it is a consequence of technology but it definitely also weaponized to hurt labor and consolidate power.

In the case of AI-assisted coding, this manifests in a culture of distrust and disrespect toward engineers, both from the bottom-up and top-down. Managers will devalue their engineers by using AI to bypass them. Peers and reports will use AI to exaggerate progress in lockstep with management. No is no longer an easy vocabulary choice when dealing with power because previously technical prowess was definitive, now it can be made “advisory”. I think this is very wrong and stupid but the market can be irrational longer than you can be solvent or something like that.

I still think it is though, that technical knowledge is still supreme. Maybe this is a cope but I find AI tooling very empowering (minus the walled garden nature of it which can be mitigated through local usage but this is problematic in its own regard). Management, pundits, and tech CEOs can frame it however they want but I feel more technically capable than at any point of my technology journey. Not at work, not in academia, but objectively from me knowing myself. We can do more in less time if we know what to do.

Was thinking of a comparison, cars are faster than walking. Imagine saying, no I prefer only walking. It is healthier than sitting in a car and your legs will atrophy. That is very much true (and we can see the consequences in car dominated societies). Nevertheless, for many industries cars are very important. You don’t say, I would rather carry all these pallets by hand rather than use a forklift.

LLMs are similar in my mind. They turbocharge your output in all senses but is less holistic than hand-coding. Like cars, you are making a trade off but I don’t think it’s fully a replacement. We still walk with cars in our lives. And we don’t eschew cars because they are “worse” for you than walking. We adapt and make tradeoffs

Now compare this to using the LLM with a grammar book and real world study mechanisms. This creates friction which actually causes your mind to learn. The LLM can serve as a tool to get specialized insight into the grammar book and accelerate physical processes (like generating all forms of a word for writing flashcards). At the end of day, you need to make an intelligent separation where the LLM ends and your learning begins.

I really like this contrast because it highlights the gap between using an LLM and actually learning. You may be able to use the LLM to pass college level courses in learning the language but unless you create friction, you actually won’t learn anything! There is definitely more nuance here but it’s food for thought

All engineering positions were based out of Israel (nothing wrong with that), they had numerous high-profile clients and seemed very connected, but honestly the tech and their vision was pretty disappointing. At first I was shocked how, with such a rudimentary system, they could be so widely in use by these huge, reputable companies! I was naive. All in all, what disappointed me the most was the amount of resources that obviously went into this company and the presumptions that reeked from it; but in my opinion, there was no deserved substance to back things up. You can argue this is the case for many American VC companies but at least to their credit, they need to put the money where their mouth is a some point or another (whether that means making a viable product or generating more hype). With this company, the vibe I got from resources I interacted with, was that they were almost “owed” this market penetration in the industry and it was very discordant to me growing up in the US tech industry where you really needed to prove yourself, at least initially, and stay growing, open-minded, always hustling.

I think reflecting on it there is probably a lot of state protection of this company and state connections between private US and Israeli individuals that guarantee clients as long as the work is as at a certain level (and yes not saying they have developed some horrible suite of software, just… small-minded). And maybe with this breathing room, it allows the role play of being a cutting-edge tech company without the risk which makes it a dream job and therefore a political asset in the polarized state. And maybe at the end of the day it’s less about building a tech company that is the best but developing Israeli institutional knowledge and collecting data, building connections, everything that isn’t software and above my pay-grade. I’m not sure.

To contrast this, I met with an Irish tech company in the same space a couple weeks later called Teamwork, I believe. The CEO himself met with me, discussed my work, even jokingly offered to hire me. Despite this guy founding a successful company, at no point did I feel “erased” or made to feel beneath him. To take a step back, I’m not making the point that “non-Israeli tech company” better than Israeli tech company. Thinking it through, I’ll say that, it seems like Gloat and the other Israeli tech companies I’ve read about, are more existentially-driven. Like doing their work, building their business, and developing their tech is predicated on surviving… which makes sense when you think it through. At the same time, from a tech focus, I think it holds them back since it’s a form of egocentrism and if you’re not the best, you need diversity of opinions to be the best.

To add a more personal opinion here which I also think is correct, all of this is intentional and deliberate and I'm sure there are people "in the know" who this is so obvious to but I'm only 25 and I only start wrapping my head around this stuff by the day. The admin clearly shaped conditions for something like this to happen but also create plausible deniability. You take people who aren't properly-vetted, and want this job, you know what will happen. Especially when you do it at scale, for a long enough time, it's an inevitability. What's the reason? Well the most scary thing I've noticed is how it's drawn a line. The other side, they're human and maybe find themselves trapped in a position but the chips are coming down. This is forcing people to take a stand that they might not agree with to remain in their community, their families, and even keep their careers, to take the step themselves of being ok with cold-blooded murder.

All this to say, for the "bad thing" to happen, it doesn't just happen, it needs to be tested and proved and honestly, no one knows exactly how to get there (though we have some historical examples to look at). So the administration is testing, proving, prodding, deliberately to shape things so the conditions for the "bad system" can arise. A bit the breaking the seals in revelation except the seals are our moral composure as a society and the rule of law. This is a big step in that direction of badness and viewing r/conservative on Reddit (very botted), you can see how dire the party line has become. That's my theory at least.

It turns out that trauma unresolved doesn’t just get better because you make yourself stronger, smarter, and less approachable. Instead you make yourself an island, keep pushing others away, and you become miserable. A red flag is the idea of being “better” than someone, even if you are! A covert narcissist might to themselves think they are a better engineer than their coworker but because they are so “self-aware” be kind and accommodating. This is a tricky spot because that line of thinking still maintains an idea of inherent superiority and it festers.. all this to say is I think our field has a lot of traumatized engineers and I think being on computers and in your head playing God can be a breeding ground for narcissism, especially the covert form. I even think this is encouraged directly in the field with the way engineers get treated as unimpeachable and as superhuman in some companies (easier to manipulate and less qualms about exploiting their fellow man). Of course you have really smart people that are genuinely empathetic and humble but I think this is a dying breed in the field. And with these people, they can be very unassuming and go unnoticed on online discourse because they are so humble and self-aware.

To be more discrete, patchwork alliances of elites stretching decades and centuries back to concentrate power. Tech companies are under the thumb of the US government and the US government is under the thumb of the elites. It's not direct but it doesn't need to be. Many soft power mechanisms exist and can be deployed when needed e.g. Visa/Mastercard censorship. The US was always founded for elites, by elites but concessions needed to be made to workers out of necessity. With technology and the destruction of unions, this is no longer the case. The veracity of this statement is still up for debate but truth won't stop them from giving it a shot (see WW2).

"Whoever can get the most stories into the heads of the masses runs the world."

I'd argue this is already the case. It has nothing to do with transformer models or AGI but basic machine learning algorithms being applied at scale in apps like TikTok, YouTube, and Facebook to addict users, fragment them, and destroy their sense of reality. They are running the world and what is happening now is their plan to keep running it, eternally, and in the most extreme fashion.