I agree with GP - day 2 dev me outclasses it, which means it isn't replacing anyone.
I do agree that there is no boring crud; that’s why gpt or no code tools are not good for full solutions (yet), but it’ll get there I am sure.
Please elaborate.
And, if true, this would be a major news story that Vox or any number of major newspapers would love to write about - so have you approached the media about this? If not, why not?
At this point, this would only affect engineers who don't understand our subject area (biotech) and are relatively junior (in the sense that their output is not much better than a GPT4 output reviewed by a more senior dev).
I simply know firsthand (i'm old, i have manager, cto, ceo friends who I go golf and play squash with) that people in data entry and programming have been let go in the past weeks because 1 person could take over their work using the gtp/chatgpt api's and do their work faster with less errors. I am recommending the same in my company as a lot of my colleagues are doing nothing anymore as the skilled seniors are doing it themselves with gpt now as it's faster, less communication etc. We feed jira issues into gpt and it generates code; we review and refine or fix ourselves. It works much much faster and with better results. Most things most of us do all day is integrating ancient API's of partners and so mapping xml/soap/... api's to our json schema's. With chatgpt that's really fast and mostly painless; it even renames the properties that need to be changed to our enums properly. With humans this is a painful and slow process, especially with people who are fast and loose (broken education seems to made many of those graduate just by cheer production speed & volume instead of quality; gpt can do that better too...).
> so have you approached the media about this? If not, why not?
Why would I do that? Even anonymous, it doesn't seem to make much sense for me to do that. Anyway; that'll come soon enough as it will be common soon.