> I believe there will be a need for far fewer of us.
I disagree. Throughout the history of computing the number of SWE's has gone up and they have become, overall, more capable [0]. That hasn't cause a need for fewer of us, in fact the demand remains overall strong.
I predict instead it will drive the need for more of us rather than less. And potentially even "better" (or at least healthier as I see it) jobs. What I mean by that is, instead of outsourcing (locally or abroad) companies will be able to bring someone in-house. In the past, dropping the load on 1-2 people would have been untenable, with LLMs/AI a number of things become plausible. And this scales to every level. The company that previous outsourced their development and could have hired 3-5 developers (but that wasn't enough) can now consider hiring them.
Yes, the larger corporations might decide they can get the same done with fewer employees, or they might decide to do more with the same.
I do think a number of SaaS tools might be in more trouble if companies decide to just build in-house alternatives that are custom for their exact needs. But perhaps SaaS will adapt to "source available" or some other kind of way to allow easier extension of their core offering so that companies just build a sidecar or thin layer over the core that covers their needs better than a "one size fits all" SaaS ever could.
Perhaps this is too rosey of a view of the future but it's one that I think is at least partly backed by the history of the industry.
[0] And at least what they're able to produce, even if you disagree about the quality.
> I do think a number of SaaS tools might be in more trouble if companies decide to just build in-house alternatives that are custom for their exact needs. But perhaps SaaS will adapt to "source available" or some other kind of way to allow easier extension of their core offering so that companies just build a sidecar or thin layer over the core that covers their needs better than a "one size fits all" SaaS ever could.
Very good point, something that I've encountered at my company already.
The latter, our company is replacing tools we used to pay for with bespoke software.
Another interesting one is the hosting of the open source equivalents of SaaS products on on-prem hardware. Turns out that agents take very well to infrastructure-as-code setups, making managing deployments of software far less work than it used to be. So we can use X database (albeit an older and less feature-rich version) on our own infrastructure that we can easily scale/tailor to our needs without paying for the enterprise SaaS version
I think the process is already ongoing for the juniors and new graduates? Now, speaking as a senior, a quite mediocre one, I wouldn’t be surprised if I can never find a similar job if I’m laid off.
I get the feeling the vast number of people already in a manager role (who are not techincally grounded) will not be able to understand the benefit of allowing SWEs to step into that role, as opposed to taking on that role themselves.
I've basically been a personal hedge fund manager for the better part of 2 years. I'm still working as a SWE because it's interesting, if I get laid off I'll be retiring.
Let's say I have 2 years to invent a new career before I'm broke.
Not a junior either, but I'd rather do anything else than be expected to turn into a middle manager for AI agents. That's not why I got into computers.
> I believe there will be a need for far fewer of us.
I disagree. Throughout the history of computing the number of SWE's has gone up and they have become, overall, more capable [0]. That hasn't cause a need for fewer of us, in fact the demand remains overall strong.
I predict instead it will drive the need for more of us rather than less. And potentially even "better" (or at least healthier as I see it) jobs. What I mean by that is, instead of outsourcing (locally or abroad) companies will be able to bring someone in-house. In the past, dropping the load on 1-2 people would have been untenable, with LLMs/AI a number of things become plausible. And this scales to every level. The company that previous outsourced their development and could have hired 3-5 developers (but that wasn't enough) can now consider hiring them.
Yes, the larger corporations might decide they can get the same done with fewer employees, or they might decide to do more with the same.
I do think a number of SaaS tools might be in more trouble if companies decide to just build in-house alternatives that are custom for their exact needs. But perhaps SaaS will adapt to "source available" or some other kind of way to allow easier extension of their core offering so that companies just build a sidecar or thin layer over the core that covers their needs better than a "one size fits all" SaaS ever could.
Perhaps this is too rosey of a view of the future but it's one that I think is at least partly backed by the history of the industry.
[0] And at least what they're able to produce, even if you disagree about the quality.
> I do think a number of SaaS tools might be in more trouble if companies decide to just build in-house alternatives that are custom for their exact needs. But perhaps SaaS will adapt to "source available" or some other kind of way to allow easier extension of their core offering so that companies just build a sidecar or thin layer over the core that covers their needs better than a "one size fits all" SaaS ever could.
Very good point, something that I've encountered at my company already.
> something that I've encountered at my company already.
On the receiving end, as in losing customers to this? Or is your company replacing tools they used to pay for?
I'm very interested in how other places are handling this.
The latter, our company is replacing tools we used to pay for with bespoke software.
Another interesting one is the hosting of the open source equivalents of SaaS products on on-prem hardware. Turns out that agents take very well to infrastructure-as-code setups, making managing deployments of software far less work than it used to be. So we can use X database (albeit an older and less feature-rich version) on our own infrastructure that we can easily scale/tailor to our needs without paying for the enterprise SaaS version
I think the process is already ongoing for the juniors and new graduates? Now, speaking as a senior, a quite mediocre one, I wouldn’t be surprised if I can never find a similar job if I’m laid off.
I would be interested to hear from juniors + new grads tbh. They're definitely the ones most immediately impacted by this
Definitely. Been thinking of police school (not in USA lol) or some other public service that is actually needed in the society.
I’m a data engineer at a massive bureaucratic institution. Working on full stack so I can build cool stuff for people
With AI taking over coding, you can become more manager role instead of SWE itself.
You can run agents by yourself on your 9-5 and still make crucial decisions in software industry.
I get the feeling the vast number of people already in a manager role (who are not techincally grounded) will not be able to understand the benefit of allowing SWEs to step into that role, as opposed to taking on that role themselves.
I've basically been a personal hedge fund manager for the better part of 2 years. I'm still working as a SWE because it's interesting, if I get laid off I'll be retiring.
Any good tips based on your experience here?
Let's say I have 2 years to invent a new career before I'm broke.
Not a junior either, but I'd rather do anything else than be expected to turn into a middle manager for AI agents. That's not why I got into computers.