I was hoping that the video was a walkthrough of your process - do you think you might share that at some point?
> I'm not a programmer anymore. I'm something else now. I don't know what it is but it's multi-disciplinary, and it doesn't involve writing code myself--for better or worse!
Yes, I agree. I think the role of software developer is going to evolve into much more of an administrative, managerial role, dealing more with working with whatever organisation you're in than actually typing code. Honestly I think it probably was always heading in this direction but it's definitely quite a step change. Wrote about it a little incoherently on my blog just this morning: https://redfloatplane.lol/blog/11-2025-the-year-i-didnt-writ...
As someone who works at a place where we do a lot of code analysis and also research AI's effect on code quality, if you do not even so much as look at your code anymore, I do not believe you are creating maintainable, quality software. Maybe you don't need to, or care to, but it's definitely not what's sustainable in long-term product companies.
AI is a force multiplier - it makes bad worse, it _can_ make good better. You need even more engineering disciplines than before to make sure it's the latter and not the former. Even with chaining code quality MCP's and a whole bunch of instructions in AGENTS.md, there's often a need to intervene and course adjust, because AI can either ignore AGENTS.md, or because whatever can pass code quality checks does not always mean the architecture is something that's solid.
That being said, I do agree our job is changing from merely writing code, to more of a managerial title, like you've said. But, there's a new limit - your ability to review the output, and you most definitely should review the output if you care about long-term sustainable, quality software.
6 months ago I agreed with your statement
but AI being solely a force multiplier is not accurate, it is a intelligence multiplier. There are significantly better ways now to apply skills and taste with less worry about technical debt. AI coding agents have gotten to the point that it virtually removes ALL effort barrierrs even paying off technical debt.
While it is still important to pay attention to the direction your code is being generated, the old fears and caution we attributed to previous iteration of AI codegen is largely being eroded and this trend will continue to the point where our "specialty" will no longer matter.
I'm already seeing small businesses that laid off their teams and the business owner is generating code themselves. The ability to defend the thinning moat of not only software but virtually all white collar jobs is getting tougher.
> if you care about long-term sustainable, quality software
If software becomes cheaper to make it amortizes at a higher rate, ie, it becomes less valuable at a faster clip. This means more ephemeral software with a shorter shelf-life. What exactly is wrong with a world where software is borderline disposable?
I’ve been using Photoshop since the 90s and without having watched the features expand over the years I don’t think I would find the tool useful for someone without a lot of experience.
This being said, short-lived and highly targeted, less feature-full software for image creation and manipulation catered to the individual and specific to an immediate task seems advantageous.
Dynamism applied not to the code but to the products themselves.
Or something like that.
> What exactly is wrong with a world where software is borderline disposable?
The quality of everything will become lower. There's no way to reliably capture thousands of business requirements and edge cases in every short-lived disposable iteration. The happy flows will probably mostly work.
We used to laugh at Eastern Europe and Soviet Union, and later China, because their knock-off products were, without exception, worse than ours. Now we're willingly doing the same to ourselves.
I am not talking about knock-off Photoshop.
> What exactly is wrong with a world where software is borderline disposable?
One problem is that people don't like learning new software interfaces, and another is that communities help support software, but communities need stable, long-lived software to foster.
Yes, I didn't do a great job of managing my language in that post (I blame flu-brain). In the case where _someone_ is going to be reading the code I output, I do review it and act more as the pilot-not-flying rather than as a passenger. For personal code (as opposed to code for a client), which is the majority of stuff that I've written since Opus 4.5 released, that's not been the case.
I'll update the post to reflect the reality, thanks for calling it out.
I completely agree with your comment. I think the ability to review code, architecture, abstractions matters more than the actual writing of the code - in fact this has really always been the case, it's just clearer now that everyone has a lackey to do the typing for them.
Instead of becoming a people manager you're just a bot manager. Same roles, different underlings.