Jensen Huang says the junior developer problem ends in two years

mkl

I think this is overly optimistic; it assumes universities reacted instantly and pivoted to teaching coding with AI as soon as it was feasible. In actuality, university curriculums cannot change quickly, and AI capabilities are changing much faster. In my experience, some students are using AI to write code, but then have no idea what's going on. The "skill" of typing "Write a function to do [basic thing]" will not make them AI-native or help them in the workplace.

BoggleOhYeah

They’re all backpedaling hard on all that “AI is going to replace you” hype.

kooi

Universities need to be "hardcore" non-AI. It is so, so easy to pick up LLM aided development. What is way harder is self-managed slop mitigation which is only achieved with employees who know the A,B,C's of software development.

igor47

I listened to this podcast and it was maddening. A few of his frames : AI is just software, nothing new to see here. AI safety is primarily a sandboxing problem. There is no collective action problem, and every company should just slow down if they think they need to slow down. There is no need for regulation because the existing incentives in the market keep companies from acting badly, which is why no company has ever done anything bad. If something bad does happen, then we can regulate after the fact. We will end up creating more jobs than we destroy, so don't worry about it. Our kids might forget a whole bunch of stuff or never learn it in the first place. But don't worry, they'll come up with new things to learn instead. The only way to get safety is to move faster because then we will more quickly arrive at safety. Recursive self-improvement is just what we've always done. The real danger is alarmism that might scare the public and the young people. Nothing bad can happen, it can only good happen.

bluecheese452

With the massive layoffs there have been massive spikes of suicides and od deaths that will only get worse. Articles like this are simply trying to cover it up.

jan_m_savage

for a guy who is in the middle of it all, the opinion seems sophomoric at best. LLMs are based on heuristics and they will always make mistakes no matter how better they get. You'd need someone to 'fine-tune' the conversation with the LLM.

peter_d_sherman

>"The first chip Huang worked on had 200 transistors, each of which he said he knew by name, while today’s engineers assemble systems from chips containing hundreds of trillions of them without ever working at that level. “Some of the lower-level knowledge is gone ,” he acknowledged, and he later described AI as “clearly” a new abstraction level in the same progression." Jensen gets it! Related: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coupling_(computer_programming... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abstraction_layer https://www.joelonsoftware.com/2002/11/11/the-law-of-leaky-a... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Tower_of_Babel https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Prat%C4%ABtyasamutp%C4%81da