With previous engineering trends like blockchains and microservices, you could choose not to jump on the bandwagon. However the coding agents trend is different and is changing the very fabric (sry for Claudeism) of software engineering, for better or worse. I do know we will never go back to mainly programming through code again, that’s for sure.
Knowledge work has changed...But it doesn't solve company internal governance nor politics.
When it takes anywhere between 2 weeks and 3months to do anything ( including approvals for non prod access) in most organizations...Code has never been the problem.
I'm starting to think there is no AI bandwagon per-se - instead the bandwagon most people associate with AI-assisted development is more a bandwagon of sloppy code and low standards - which irresponsible use of AI enables but isn't a prerequisite for (outsourcing sweatshops have been practicing it long before the dawn of LLMs).
I think it's not an option. The benefits are just too large for me.
>I do know we will never go back to mainly programming through code again, that’s for sure.
I think, in some niches, i.e. where there's something not well represented in the training set, it still makes sense to write code by hand. But I am not sure that it will continue.
There are still companies who refuse to believe this and still put Senior+ devs through hell during an interview process with junior level algorithm memorization.
In all aspects there will be dinosaurs and deniers and there will be embracers.
I don’t particularly mind algorithmic interview questions (they’re at least self-contained, somewhat objective, and something you can prepare for), but most software engineering has always been done by people with no knowledge of algorithms or compsci fundamentals. What’s being lost is coding fluency, not compsci knowledge.
I think you misread. I never said not to learn it. In fact, for your entry level I would recommend testing for it. At senior+ it should be more about software architecture, design patterns, and distributed systems.
Better example, leetcode interviews became so popular because people were memorizing FizzBuzz and they needed an alternative (but said interviewers didn't fully understand the purpose of FizzBuzz and though "harder means better, right?").
leetcode interviews be ame a thing, because many believed solving leetcode style puzzles makes you superior. Not because someone would memorize fizzbuzz.
This thinking was popularized by coding competions which existed before leetcode and inspired leetcode. Schools themselves produced people who believed these puzzles are what makes you superior developer - one of us, special and choosen.
