.NET
Search documents
从业 43 年的程序员直言:AI 不会取代程序员,软件开发的核心从未改变
程序员的那些事· 2026-01-12 00:48
Core Viewpoint - The article argues that AI will not replace software developers, emphasizing that the future of software development remains in the hands of developers who can translate ambiguous human thoughts into precise computational logic [1][2]. Group 1: Historical Context - The prediction that "programmers will be replaced" has never come true throughout the history of computing, which spans over 43 years [3]. - The author has witnessed multiple technological revolutions, each heralded as the end of programmers, such as the rise of Visual Basic and low-code platforms [4][6]. - Historical cycles show that each wave of technology has led to an increase in the number of programs and programmers, exemplifying the "Jevons Paradox" with a market size of $1.5 trillion [9]. Group 2: Differences with Current Technology - The current wave of Large Language Models (LLMs) differs significantly from past technologies in scale and impact, with LLMs not reliably improving development speed or software reliability [10][11]. - Unlike previous technologies that provided stable and reliable solutions, LLMs often slow down development and create a dual loss situation unless real bottlenecks are addressed [11]. Group 3: Essence of Programming - The core challenge of programming has always been converting vague human ideas into logical and precise computational expressions, a difficulty that persists regardless of the programming tools used [12][17]. - The complexity of programming lies not in the syntax but in understanding what needs to be achieved, a challenge that remains unchanged over decades [17][18]. Group 4: Future Outlook - AI will not eliminate the need for programmers; instead, the demand for skilled developers will continue to grow, especially as companies realize the true costs and limitations of AI technologies [19][20]. - The future of software development will likely see AI playing a supportive role, assisting in tasks like prototype code generation, while the critical decision-making and understanding will still rely on human developers [19][20].
美国“斩杀线”引热议!年薪 45 万美元程序员半年变流浪汉
程序员的那些事· 2026-01-06 03:33
Core Viewpoint - The article highlights the precarious nature of high-income jobs in the tech industry, illustrating how a sudden loss of income can lead to a rapid descent into financial ruin and homelessness, as exemplified by the story of a programmer who went from earning $450,000 to becoming a homeless individual in just six months [3][10]. Group 1: The "Killing Line" Concept - The term "Killing Line" originally from gaming refers to a critical threshold that, once crossed, leads to irreversible consequences in life, reflecting the fragility of individual and collective survival in society [2]. Group 2: The Programmer's Financial Struggles - The programmer, Jack, had a high salary of $450,000, equivalent to over 3 million RMB, but faced monthly fixed expenses totaling $16,500, including a $12,000 mortgage, $3,000 car loan, and $1,500 in insurance, leaving him with little to no savings [3][4]. - Jack's financial situation exemplifies the "high salary, low savings" phenomenon prevalent among the American middle class, where individuals are often trapped in a cycle of high expenses and lack of financial buffers [4]. Group 3: Job Loss and Its Consequences - Jack's life took a downturn due to an unexpected layoff, a common occurrence in the U.S. employment system, which allows employers to terminate employees without cause or severance [5]. - The tech industry is experiencing a wave of job losses due to AI advancements, making it increasingly difficult for displaced workers like Jack to find new employment [7]. Group 4: Medical Debt and Bankruptcy - Following his job loss, Jack faced a medical emergency that resulted in a $60,000 bill, of which only $12,000 was covered by insurance, leading to insurmountable debt and the loss of his home [8]. - Medical debt is a significant contributor to personal bankruptcies in the U.S., with approximately 25-35% of bankruptcies directly linked to medical expenses, even among insured individuals [10]. Group 5: The Cycle of Despair - Jack's situation illustrates a vicious cycle of homelessness and credit destruction, where lack of a permanent address hinders job applications, further exacerbating his financial instability [9]. - The systemic issues in the U.S. economy, including weak employment protections and a credit system that penalizes individuals for financial misfortunes, contribute to the rapid decline of individuals like Jack from stability to homelessness [10].
“同事介绍私活,甲方说酬金 12 万,但同事只给我 5 万,这合理么?我肝了两个多月,每天熬到一两点”
程序员的那些事· 2026-01-05 15:41
Group 1 - The article discusses the importance of maintaining a proper mindset when engaging in freelance work, particularly in the context of compensation and relationships with colleagues [2] - It emphasizes that freelancers should evaluate their own costs and the fairness of the compensation received, rather than focusing on how much their colleagues earn from the same project [2] - The article suggests that maintaining good relationships with colleagues can lead to more opportunities for freelance work in the future [2] Group 2 - The article provides an analogy comparing freelance work to a company project, highlighting that employees typically do not expect to receive a large share of profits from a project completed for their employer [2] - It points out that the colleague who referred the freelance opportunity may have incurred costs or invested effort that is not immediately visible to the freelancer [2] - The overall message encourages freelancers to appreciate the opportunities provided by others and to foster positive professional relationships [2]
年薪 15 万程序员下班送外卖,自称解压放松。网友:工作不饱和了吧
程序员的那些事· 2025-08-25 06:35
Core Viewpoint - The article discusses the unconventional choice of a programmer, referred to as "Xiao Ma Ge," who works at a state-owned enterprise in Zhengzhou, China, earning an annual salary of approximately 150,000 yuan. He engages in food delivery as a form of relaxation and also pursues self-media as a potential career path [1][3]. Group 1 - Xiao Ma Ge's primary motivation for delivering food is to relieve stress from his job, which involves significant logical thinking. He finds the activity enjoyable and likens it to a treasure hunt [1]. - The article highlights the mixed reactions from the public regarding Xiao Ma Ge's decision to deliver food, with some questioning why a salaried employee would take on such work [3][4]. - There is speculation that Xiao Ma Ge's food delivery is more about promoting his self-media endeavors rather than just relaxation, suggesting a deeper ambition behind his actions [4][5]. Group 2 - The article notes that Xiao Ma Ge's annual salary of 150,000 yuan could potentially increase to 300,000 yuan as he gains more experience in his field, indicating a positive career trajectory [5]. - The contrasting mindsets between those with a safety net (like Xiao Ma Ge) and those without (who may rely solely on food delivery for income) are discussed, emphasizing how this affects their approach to work and stress [5].
程序员:在 8 家公司当工具人后,终于明白“有用”和“被重视”差了 10 条街
程序员的那些事· 2025-06-04 02:13
Core Viewpoint - Understanding the distinction between being "useful" and being "valued" in the workplace is crucial for career development and personal growth [3][4]. Group 1: Definitions and Implications - "Useful" refers to being proficient in specific tasks, allowing superiors to delegate work confidently, but often leads to being seen as merely filling gaps rather than being integral to strategic discussions [6]. - "Valued" means being included in core conversations and decision-making processes, which provides opportunities for meaningful growth and contribution to the company [6]. Group 2: Personal Experiences - During a company crisis, an individual was recognized as essential not just for past performance but for future contributions, receiving a retention bonus equivalent to 50% of total compensation [10]. - In a later role, despite achieving targets and receiving bonuses, the individual felt stagnant as they were not invited to strategic discussions, highlighting the difference between being "useful" and "valued" [12]. Group 3: Recommendations - Individuals are encouraged to reflect on their roles and assess whether they are merely "useful" or genuinely "valued" within their organizations [13].