this post was submitted on 27 Jun 2026
423 points (98.2% liked)

Technology

87598 readers
4267 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Armand1@lemmy.world 78 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (50 children)

In my experience, AI is an amplifier.

Good engineers will produce more good code, because they ask the right questions, know what good looks like and check the output.

Bad engineers will produce reams more bad code. The mistakes they make will be amplified. They will give wrong and incomplete instructions, won't see what the problems are with the result and will ship it anyway.

This amplification also means people will spend a larger proportion of time reviewing than coding, which I think is less interesting.

All of this is stuff that can, to some extent, be addressed with policy. You help and instruct juniors, encourage people to better understand and own their code, or at worst reprimand them if they don't.

You can adjust expectations of product managers and explain to them that more is not better, as it always has been. Faster development can often come with bugs and tech debt and this is more of the same.

All I've said above is puts aside the ethical arguments of using or not using AI of course. That's a separate can of worms entirely.

[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 15 points 2 months ago* (last edited 2 months ago) (18 children)

Nah, good engineers are retiring, bad engineers are running rampant. You give yourself away calling us engineers, we were never, except for some yearly title increase instead of money. Just programmers, and that is fine. Engineer is a whole other thing from the steam age, my BSc was in Math, worked fine to get me in.

[–] finalarbiter@lemmy.dbzer0.com 41 points 2 months ago (14 children)

Engineer is a whole other thing from the steam age, my BSc was in Math, worked fine to get me in.

As a mechanical engineer, I would beg to differ. When you strip away all the fancy math, engineering is ultimately about critical thought and solving problems/achieving functionality with limited resources. As one of my professors liked to say, "Anyone can build a bridge to support a load, but only an engineer can design a bridge that just barely holds that load."

Engineering is an ancient domain that goes back to the very beginnings of civilization and continues to grow with our needs as we progress. Where once it was just mechanical, we now have domains like electrical, materials, and biomedical engineering. If we've hit a point where we need engineers who specialize in software, why shouldn't we welcome in a new domain?

While it does feel weird calling software developers 'engineers', that is arguably what they do. It's no less reductionist to suggest they are just programmers than it is to suggest that mechanical engineers are simply CAD and Excel jockeys. There's a layer of comprehension about the systems in play and how they can be manipulated that gets lost in the reduction.

My only real sticking point about software engineers where I tend to push back is that Professional Engineer is a legally protected title and indicates licensure, at least in the US. It requires the right degree(s) and several years of work supervised by a PE to qualify for that licensure. The importance of the PE license is that you are recognized as an authority in your field- for good or ill. You can make big decisions, but you will also be held accountable if something goes wrong.

In my experience, many software engineers brush aside the importance of those types of qualifications because their field wasn't quite as rigorous to enter. As we continue to develop a society where software mistakes can absolutely kill people (e.g. self-driving vehicles, robots, automated decision tools in medicine and insurance, etc) or cause massive economic damage, it's critical that we decide how software engineers play a role in preventing those things and how we hold them accountable when they don't.

[–] MalReynolds@slrpnk.net 13 points 2 months ago

Wow, that was a screed, (a worthy one) and yeah, an engineering degree should be special IMO, as perhaps a (pure) Math one. should also be. We have a tendency to regard you lesser, in self defense,, but that professional responsibility is significant, a more elegant weapon from a more civilized age. I do apologize,, the steam age thing was out of line (but meant with heart, trains rock, and IMO is where 'engineering' started) has it's roots.

load more comments (13 replies)
load more comments (16 replies)
load more comments (47 replies)