Software dev job postings are up 15% since mid 2025
Posted by IdeasInProcess@reddit | programming | View on Reddit | 369 comments
Been watching this FRED data for a while. Software development job postings on Indeed hit a low point around May 2025, then climbed steadily for 10 months straight and are now sitting about 15% higher than that trough. The recent acceleration from January 2026 onwards is pretty sharp.
This runs directly against the AI is killing developer jobs narrative that's been everywhere for the past two years.
I might be wrong but i think AI might actually be creating more software demand, not less. More products get built because the cost of building dropped. Someone still has to architect the systems, build the tooling, maintain the infrastructure. that's all still dev work.
Curious what people here are actually seeing. Are you busier or less busy than two years ago? And if you're hiring, is the bar different now?
actuarialisticly@reddit
Yup, I’ve been spouting this. My company has been hiring like crazy. But reddit is too doom and gloom to realize the reality of the world.
ljimage@reddit
What type of stuff does your company do? All of this data is so noisy it’s hard to tell what direction things will be going in.
Miserygut@reddit
Anecdotal comments from my friend's husband who runs a recruitment agency which focuses on techies;
When I spoke to him at the end of January the number of available job postings his company were working with were up 3x compared to the end of 2025 last year (total open positions ~£2 million -> ~£6 million at the start of 2026).
All, bar none, of the 'Implement AI' projects that his clients had set up in 2025 were ended and all had moved to a 'see how it goes' approach to AI. In turn this meant they are hiring actual people again.
So that's on the positive side of things.
The downside are the significant layoffs from other businesses who are being heavily disrupted for one reason or another. Many overhired and overpaid during 2022-2023 and are restructuring off the back of those layoffs.
brissiebogan@reddit
AI is not going to take your job, but you are mad if you are not using AI to code. I have been in this game for 30+ years now, mainly C and C++ for most of that. You can only guide AI to do what you want, it cant take over. But, AI is really, REALLY, fukn good at writing code most of the time. You just need to babysit it.
recycled_ideas@reddit
It's OK, for some tasks, but it's not faster and it's a lot less fun.
Harzza@reddit
Can you elaborate on it not being faster? Alao interested to know what tools / models you use
recycled_ideas@reddit
It's just straight up not faster. By the time you explain, in detail exactly what you want and properly review the code it's just not faster most of the time.
I've used all the models, in certain problem spaces it does a great job, but you have to explain the problem in detail, you have to keep it ok track so it doesn't get stuck in a loop or implement the wrong thing and you have to review and understand what it's doing and what it's done. And all that takes time.
Now if you're a junior who's been given a very detailed task and someone else is going to do the review work for you it can feel super fast, but if you have to do that work it slows down a lot and while you're a lot slower than a senior you're also a lot slower at speccing and reviewing a task.
LastMeeting2193@reddit
Did you try codex integrated in your codebase? I have a feeling you didnt
recycled_ideas@reddit
Do you actually review and understand the code it generates? Do you properly understand the problem you asked it to solve?
It's super easy to make it seem really fast if you're borderline criminally negligent and incompetent yourself.
LastMeeting2193@reddit
Ehm yes, I review it and i understand it? And yes I properly understand the problem. I dont get what you are trying to get at hah. I am not an AI defender btw, I hate it, but I hate it even more that I am seeing with my own eyes how the demand for programers will possibly go even more down. Maybe even not, idk, but even my seniors are not optimistic soo…
recycled_ideas@reddit
What I am trying to get at is that the time that programming tasks take is not the typing, the time is design and review, it's thinking of edge cases and how they'll be handled. You can't trust the AI to do all of that at this point and so you need to do all of of and you need to do it properly.
That work is between two thirds and three quarters of the time it takes to do most tasks so even if the AI was instant and perfect you'd only see a 25-33% improvement and it's not.
If you're seeing massive speedups it's because you're not doing your human in the loop part.
Aeder@reddit
There's even some research on how it's not actually faster, and at least one attempt at reproducing the research immediately realized it would take months of gathering data to see if there's any improvement that raises above statistical noise, so if the improvement exists, it's tiny.
brissiebogan@reddit
When you want to make money, its not about it being fun, its about getting the job done.
Like i said, I have been in this industry for 30+ years now. IF you want it to be fun get an academic job. IF you want to make make money and get paid then you need to get what the business wants done, done well and done fast.
recycled_ideas@reddit
Enjoying your work makes life a lot less shit.
Sure, but AI isn't actually faster, it's definitely not better, it has its uses, but it's not the right solution for everything.
No one fucking cares, I've got over twenty.
brissiebogan@reddit
Yet here I am, 30 odd years in and I still enjoy what I do. AI and all.
recycled_ideas@reddit
It's absolutely about what I want. I'm not a slave.
If AI was doubling my speed then I'd have to suck it up and make it work, but it's just not.
brissiebogan@reddit
This is the reason why IT geeks are hated.
recycled_ideas@reddit
Because I'm not stupid enough to sublimate all of my desires to a company that doesn't give a fuck about me?
This shit isn't making you a 10x developer, it's probably not making you a 1.2x developer. I use it where it makes sense, but that's not everywhere.
I do my job well, I use AI to boost my performance where it makes sense, but I also want to not want to off myself every day when I go to work.
brissiebogan@reddit
So from bagging AI, to admitting you use AI to boost your performance?
recycled_ideas@reddit
Did I bag it?
I said that it's less fun, I said the performance boost isn't huge and I said that it's only useful in very specific contexts.
I actually said I use it, selectively, a bunch of times.
not_a-mimic@reddit
And it'll get done. Don't need AI to do it.
Ok_Practice_6702@reddit
I use AI for some code, and I’m still mad.
Aeroflight@reddit
Who the hell is downvoting this post? If you aren't versed in AI assisted programming, you aren't geting hired for anything other than a junior position.
BCProgramming@reddit
It's FOMO bullshit. The "You gotta learn it, AI is here to stay, like the web/etc".
Personally, I think the reality is probably more like NFTs or like, Web 3.0. People will eventually realize it's worthless, and the whole market around it will collapse. A bunch of rich assholes will get even richer, and the illusion will be shattered for a lot of developers. And developers who are "versed in AI assisted programming" (eg. became dependent on a subscription tool) will find themselves in an unenviable position of being underqualified for any role because they can no longer do anything.
What the other comment said:
is downright laughable. It reveals they have not been "in this game for 30+ years". AI tools create dogshit code that takes more effort to get working or fix than it would have taken to have written that code in the first place. Furthermore, "Writing code" isn't even that big a part of programming to begin with beyond the "learning" stage, so the idea that it's any sort of massive productivity boost makes no sense to begin with, And the belief it is is inexperience, not insight.
There's always something funny about how you need to "guide" AI, too. It's like speaking of a toddler - "Oh little Allan is potty-trained. You just have to guide him, because sometimes he shits his pants".
crazyeddie123@reddit
And developers who are "versed in AI assisted programming" (eg. became dependent on a subscription tool) will find themselves in an unenviable position of being underqualified for any role because they can no longer do anything.
How quickly do you think we forget everything we know about making software? When the AI companies decide it's time to stop bleeding money and charge reasonable (high) prices, you really think we'll be helplessly starting at a blank IDE?
brissiebogan@reddit
Started writing code when I was in school, back then it was apple IIe and Z80's. This was in the day when we had to use assembly language.
There is no FOMO about AI for me, I am at the end of my career, ready to retire. The only reason I am doing what I do now is because I enjoy it.
VeryLazyFalcon@reddit
bc that account is a bot
sunnyata@reddit
What makes you think that?
VeryLazyFalcon@reddit
4 days old account shilling AI. Also from their history:
sunnyata@reddit
The age of the account is just ad hom, people make new ones all the time. Is everyone who has positive opinions about AI "shilling"? "You are mad if you are not using AI to code" is a reasonable opinion IMO. I suppose that makes me a bot too, looking forward to getting paid by, err, somebody.
brissiebogan@reddit
Bingo. I just created a new account!
And to address /u/VeryLazyFalcon , I am just starting to learn AI. I started about 6 months ago. In this industry, if you are not learning you should probably find a new career. I am also learning c#, but I started learning that when it first was released.
Harzza@reddit
I think people who don't value AI coding tools haven't used the best tools, that are on a totally different level compared to what they were capable of like a year ago
brissiebogan@reddit
I own my own business, so I get paid based on what I deliver. I am only just learning how to use AI, but I am sold.
My niche area of expertise is data comms, very low level and usually very proprietary. AI doesn't really have a lot of data on what I do, yet I can still set it to work and it does an excellent job. AI is also exceptional in doing repetitive boiler plate coding.
Bakoro@reddit
At least some of these people tried to get ChatGPT to write 10k lines of code back in 2023, failed, and that's been their impression the whole time.
That's not even hyperbole, some of the people I see complaining are making arguments against 2021/2022 LLMs as if that's at all relevant in a world with multimodal LLM agent models.
I had someone cite a corporate blog post from 2024 that said something like "LLMs only do text, they cannot see images, process sounds, or run programs, and that's why they'll never be the route to higher intelligence".
That shit was already outdated when it was written, and by the end of that same year, +80% of the article was completely invalidated.
Pichuck@reddit
I had it categorize and name images from a camera roll with about 70% efficiency. The rest were hilariously wrong. But still saved me some time. Same thing with coding. I still have to act as a nanny but I save tons of time on boilerplate and setup especially. Id say on average the time savings aren't amazing (people saying 10x are either generating slop or doing trivial shit) but probably a solid 25% increase in productivity factoring in the extra reviewing of code, time spent prompting, building agents etc. 25% is nothing to scoff at. Thats worth a lot of money.
Bakoro@reddit
I definitely 10x the GUI work I do, but that's because it's the least important and most boring part of the job, and I don't really want to do it in the first place.
I'm straight up not going to even try to memorize 4 different GUI frameworks.
Pichuck@reddit
Yeah, but if its gui work you can easily prompt without knowing the underlying frameworks you're either doing something trivial or slop. Trying to have opus 4.6 make a fairly simple get data from database based on auth'd user and show on dashboard was extremely slow in react for example. Took me a ton of time to get it down from 2s to 0.5 after it was generated. If you're okay with the 2 second solution that looks like all the other ones its great for gui. Also either its better at JavaScript or I'm worse so I cant tell how bad its doing, lmao.
Bakoro@reddit
I do R&D in materials science and semiconductors. I could not give less of a shit about how the GUI looks most of the time, or if it takes 2 seconds vs 0.5 seconds, I just need to set up experiments and view data.
FYI, most scientists and engineers refuse to learn terminal commands and will never read instructions.
LLMs making buttons for me has accelerated science by at least year, because I can focus on actual science instead of writing buttons, and my team of scientists and engineers get their buttons faster.
Like it or not, this is what peak LLM coding looks like.
If you have used a lithium battery or literally any computer in the past 4 years: you're welcome.
Pichuck@reddit
I didn't say your other work was trivial, just your gui. Sounds like an RA by the size of the silicon chip on your shoulder.
There were plenty of drag and drop libraries and other simple ways to solve this before that could've been easily learned, especially if you dont care at all about performance (and why would you if its not enduser focused?). I do agree with you that scientists for being so interested in their subject matters have a weird aversion to actually improve their process and by extension get to spend more time doing their science. Happy to be finished with academia and all the egos!
Aeroflight@reddit
Agreed
brissiebogan@reddit
Who cares who is downvoting it? They are not paying my bills!!
cake-day-on-feb-29@reddit
Am I? What does this mean? What, exactly, am I missing here?
I have a hard time trusting AI-generated code to work with strict typing and memory safety, I can't imagine something like this. The ease at which it could hallucinate an API is already so high.
I heard someone say that AI code is already like a footgun. And of course C is the classical footgun. What happens when you multiply footguns?
brissiebogan@reddit
The thing with AI, is it can write hundreds of lines of code in seconds. I cant do that. Even the fastest touch type nerd cant do that. IT can also debug my code faster than I can.
But you are 100% correct, you cant trust AI. So you need to review everything it does. Get it to write the code and do a code review. Sometime is fucks it up (a lot for me because I do low level coding) but at the end of the day it still speeds up my workflow.
BTW, I have not used AI for C to date. In this day and age, the only place I think most people would use C anymore is for drivers or microprocessors, and don't do a lot of either anymore.
Another thing I love about AI, is its a pretty good teacher. I have started transitioning to C# in the last 12 months. My 2 training tools are the source code that has been open sourced by Microsoft, and AI. I had a very low level issue the other day when I was totally convinced that AI it wrong. Well I had to eat shit because it was right and I was wrong. This was about 20 lines of code that I ended up inspecting in x86 assembly language.
RandomNick42@reddit
That's the meta in the product team next door (I am client facing, what we're doing is a bit different) and also what I got doing my own side projects with AI.
You can't tell it to code an app and expect a result. If you don't know what you're doing, you'll get something, but it will be buggy, insecure mess.
Getting a useable application still requires you to know what you're doing, what's happening where and why. Then you can have it write the actual code, especially boilerplate.
Budget-Length2666@reddit
Jan-Apr is generally more hiring intensive as budgets get approved.
GeoSystemsDeveloper@reddit
Yes, hiring may be up, but the market is full of top talent ... quite competetive
pawsibility@reddit
Puts on tin-foil hat
I agree it, at the very least, feels competitive. However I found the argument from one of the top commenters quite compelling:
Everyone, now with AI, has the ability to appear like some 10X engineer, when in reality, the majority are not. Companies can no longer discern between a quality candidate and a bad candidate.
Its so easy to fake your way through it now, and so much "you're not gonna make it brop"-ism out there; endless slop! I've started to go full conspiratorial... thinking it's a real, concerted effort by higher powers to astroturf and acquire mind-share and make people feel behind so they work harder and longer and faster.
Takes off tin foil hat
seld_m_break@reddit
And most importantly cheaper, they will tell you you aren't special anymore and 100 people can do your job just as good, if not better in the morning if you leave so no pay rise this year, no stock refresh and you were lucky to get any bonus at all. Senior VP at large multinational told me the good old days are over now in software, they truly believe we are very overpaid and are using AI to correct that.
Here's your tinfoil hat back
move_machine@reddit
This is happening
cake-day-on-feb-29@reddit
A far more likely explanation is that the individuals who are also applying to said jobs are doing so in a way that they believe will maximize their chances of getting the job. Hence, they use AI in a way to make themselves look better.
Miserygut@reddit
Very competitive.
Betelgeuzeflower@reddit
At this point AI might have a strong decentralizing effect in business.
Miserygut@reddit
It might. I think everyone is and will be trying to figure out what AI is or isn't good at for a good while yet. Disruption will happen in niches as the software and ecosystems around LLMs improve, like we've already seen with software like opencode.ai
Chaseshaw@reddit
I"m seeing this too. Thing is, it's increasing in recruitment agencies and contract staffing companies. Overall job posts dont seem to be increasing, just the companies figured out their HR depts get overwhelmed with AI slop applications and can't fill the position, so they're offloading to recruiters to do the filter-work.
Rollingprobablecause@reddit
I think we're heading toward a slightly smaller recovery. Companies are probably better at hiring now that ZIRP is over so it's sustainable. I also have noticed salaries haven't changed too much. RSUs are being reigned in slightly but that's because of outside issues (aka politics).
I'm hiring for my teams right now and the biggest challenge has been trying to find skilled engineers that aren't bro/vibe-coders during the testing and eval interviews. We're struggling to find actual engineers to the point we're requiring compsci degrees again to weed out. I realize it's not fair but I think our jobs are pretty much evolving to where they can no longer be self taught. We need people who understand fully what's going on from a logic, science, and math perspective.
Lewis0981@reddit
Currently looking for a job to supplement my freelance gigs slowing down. Would you consider someone with 4 years of experience working on production projects to be too high risk if they don't have a degree?!I started freelancing a year or two before the AI boom really happened and I hope that shows I'm not vibe-coding, but I don't have a CS degree. Curious if you'd pass me over. Not having much luck with applications.
Rollingprobablecause@reddit
We'd probably be 50/50 as I am looking for mid-levels (4-8 years) so you'd be at the low end tbh. Not having a CS degree puts you a little lower though at IC1 level as an assumption that can be adjusted/proven to level up during panels.
During the technical interview you'd be treated the same as anyone else if you got past HM screens.
**Yes 4+ is mid level (there's way too many people spoiled by FAANG or ZIRP that think promotions are unlimited and happen every year and 4 is a sr role...its not)
Lewis0981@reddit
I'd call myself mid level, I think that's a fair assessment of someone with 4 years experience. What do you do to test your candidates skill level? Leet code type coding challenges?
I got fairly lucky in my pivot to software engineering. Found a guy in the dairy industry and was able to get myself a few contracts. Have applied for 100's of jobs over the years, and have thus far not gotten so much as an interview. Probably put out 100 this year and haven't heard anything back. Do resumes without a degree even make it to you, or are they screened out by an automated system?
If you'd be willing I'd really appreciate a glance at my resume from someone who hires for SWE roles. Not asking for an essay, just a glance and some general feedback as to if and/or why you'd pass me up. Absolutely no worries if not, I understand not wanting to do your job in your free time. Appreciate your response here either way!
issani40@reddit
Even with a CompSCI degree it doesn’t mean they understand or can perform. I lost count of how many junior devs that made me want to put my head through a wall when mentoring them on even the basics of debugging.
Rollingprobablecause@reddit
Nobody made that claim. However, there's better odds head to head if you take someone whos self taught for 2 years vs a CS grad with that sam experience.
I've been hiring for 10 years now in leadership roles, it's pretty obvious the difference in educations over that time period.
Does that mean people with degrees are the best or that people without them can't perform? Absolutely not, but the 80/20 rule is pretty damn true.
snlacks@reddit
Many are just reaching the "let's try to replace everyone with AI phase" and startup's are seeing shake ups (as usual) as the latest trends are moving really fast.
Easy_Werewolf7903@reddit
Over hired and over paid in 2022 and 2023? What time line is this? Go to layoff.fyi and tell me what you see.
Miserygut@reddit
Layoff stats with no corresponding salaries or hiring figures.
Sylvia_HH@reddit
This feels directionally encouraging, even if the lived experience still sucks for a lot of people. More demand can be real, while the hiring market is still messy and frustrating.
No_Departure_1878@reddit
I did not get that, what do you mean?
Miserygut@reddit
There was a belief at the time that AI may be implemented as a 'big bang' at this companies and it didn't work out that way. The ecosystem around AI seems to be changing every 6 months so they've taken a more pragmatic approach to it. Not to mention industry-focused AIs seem to be producing better results than 'unfocused' models now.
SpaceToaster@reddit
There was a popular hypothesis that radiologist will go away because AI would completely take over their field. AI is now in every radiology office…. and the number of radiologists has actually increased. It turns out that making it cheaper and faster to perform radiology increases the volume that the hospital can do requiring more people to review and be interacting with patients.
Postage_Stamp@reddit
This sounds a lot like a study I read about on traffic congestion years ago. They found that if you try and build new lanes to decrease traffic congestion you just get more people driving. Building more roads lead to more congestion not less.
k1v1uq@reddit
This is how capitalism works and wealth is extracted from workers. You get paid 1 Euro per hour for making cakes. Your initial velocity is 1 cake / hour. Then I get a machine (AI) that lets you produce 20 cakes in the same time. But you will still be paid for one hour, and I will deny you a raise because you must also pay off the debt for my machine while I plan building my third house. Two generations later, your offspring is still working for me for 1 euro per hour while my family cruises around the Mediterranean Sea.
cake-day-on-feb-29@reddit
"I am entitled to more money because, because, just because!!!"
Redditor moment.
Why didn't you buy the damn machine and pump out your own cakes?
The fuck?
It's crazy how many people do nothing and then get upset that other people are making more than them. You've done nothing, you've attempted to do nothing. You've not attempted to get a raise nor find a higher paying job. You sit there doing the mindless repetitive task every day then get mad at "the man" because that magically did not make you rich.
baarinh@reddit
You’re getting mad on the man, that is exploiting your work, and is strong-arming you into much less profitable agreement. That’s because he has a much stronger position in the negotiation (owning the machinery that you work on, or having big capital).
Workers never get a fair deal
k1v1uq@reddit
You could as well as ask the Walmart heirs about their incredible contribution that made them earn that sweet trust money. But these are really just moral arguments. If I die tomorrow or sell my own cakes (let others make my cakes) get rich or bankrupt, nothing would change. And as an engineer I do understand systems, I'm not so much interested in individual actors. The simple conclusion is that there is no objective criteria why I should get rich when people work for me vs if I actually make the cake. A cake was made. So this is about power, who controls the wealth that a society produces. Basically a class system.
SandersDelendaEst@reddit
This is a little bit of simplistic analysis. Because what happens when you purchase a machine to make 20 cakes per hour? You hire an accountant, a manager, an engineer, etc etc. And now your business that employed one baker a mediocre wage, employs many people at a variety of wages including very good wages.
HappyAngrySquid@reddit
I mean, there’s some truth to this, but it also means cakes become less expensive which in turn means more people can afford to eat them. If you don’t cut your prices, and there is a truly competitive market, your competitors will keep their original margins and thus undercut you and put you out of business.
So, the real picture is more nuanced and difficult to see.
k1v1uq@reddit
sure but, it's not too difficult. You are right, goods and services tend get cheaper because of competition. So do wages (more people with fewer skills can do the same job + the output per worker and hour goes up). This is why capitalism runs into these cyclic crises, companies produce way more stuff than society can consume with fewer and fewer people. Poor people don't consume. Local markets stagnate.. Tax revenues stagnate. Which triggers national governments to start tariff wars and pressure their population into cheaper and less secure jobs. Sometimes they even risk war to secure economic sovereignty and control of external markets and resources (other peoples stuff).
But anyway in these pockets of economic growth based on cheap labor and high productivity (1990-2020), true wealth was accumulated. People got so rich that no government couldn't let them go bust. The world's working class had to cover for their private losses (subprime).
People like the Walmart heirs live their lives under a different set of rules. And because of compound interest managed by family trust they have isolated themselves from risk and uncertainty. This is what wealth gives you, permanent immunity from chaos and competition. It's the ultimate form of freedom.
Rorasaurus_Prime@reddit
I've long been using this example as evidence AI is first and foremost a human force multiplier, not a replacement. Sure, someone with zero programming experience can make a relatively simple app for a smart phone and get it deployed, but as soon as it requires a proper back-end with queues, databases, caches, distribution mechanisms... that's where it falls flat. Agents will have a good go and architecting it, but putting it together? Still needs a human to drive it and notice the mistakes that it will absolutely make.
Actually_a_dolphin@reddit
For now, sure. Give it another couple of years and this will not be the case.
TracePoland@reddit
But it relies on the economy not being obliterated by a certain guy. That logic doesn’t apply if consumer demand collapses.
Neat-Ad8119@reddit
This radiologist example is a myth. The demand spiked way more than number of radiologists added.
While AI haven’t replaced them, it did reduce the potential number . Meaning if there were no AI , we would have even more radiologists.
Mesapholis@reddit
love that for medicine tbh
LagT_T@reddit
Lotus 1-2-3 was the end of accountants.
WallyMetropolis@reddit
This is Jevon's paradox.
jaynoj@reddit
TIL, thanks!
DubiousGames@reddit
The number of radiologists isn’t something that can just increase overnight. Even if demand went to infinite it would take a minimum of 4 years to train new radiologists, and that’s assuming new reaidency spots open up.
The number of doctors in every field is increasing, that’s what happens when the population of a country is constantly growing, is the number of people employed in almost every occupation increases. Attributing any of that to AI is absurd.
No_Departure_1878@reddit
Cheaper and faster plus more radiologists means lower salaries.
red75prime@reddit
The number was increasing before and it continues to increase, because...
"Clinical Radiology Workforce Census 2024"
It just indicates that AI tools haven't been certified for autonomous usage.
valarauca14@reddit
Basically, Jevon's paradox.
We've seen it dozens of times during the industrial revolution. Cotton gin, steam engine, Water loom, etc. A tool that makes
Xrole obsolete ends up creating a lot work somewhere else.21Rollie@reddit
What will happen really is the amount of work we’re expected to output will multiply, but the number of jobs will barely budge. Like industrialization, the cotton gin, or the invention of the computer, the worker will miss out completely on the increased value of their labor
curiousdannii@reddit
Though remember that processing scans is what classifying AI is great at. The grift is generative AI.
deja-roo@reddit
In most fields/industries, making something cheaper means people use it a lot more, they don't just use the same amount and pocket the savings.
Especially if they are selling it as a service. It's a no-brainer to just do more business if they can now do it faster and cheaper.
reddit_clone@reddit
For the first time, day before yesterday, my dentist showed me an AI evaluation of my dental X-Rays during a routine cleaning.
I honestly didn't know to how to feel about that.
whyyoudidit@reddit
most industries are limited by demand. Revenue is where it is at not because they couldn't find any developers but because the TAM is limited and not growing very hard.
baarinh@reddit
You’re getting mad at the man, who is exploiting your work. And that’s because he has much stronger position in the negotiation (he owns the machinery f.ex., and have much more capital)
Ok_Practice_6702@reddit
Are these job postings for the people who have been unable to get jobs when it was 15% lower, or jobs where they’re just gonna sponsor a visa because nobody that applies meets ridiculous requirements.
goranlu@reddit
In my opinion, there is still demand for seniors, but barely some demand for juniors
Alarmed_Rip7852@reddit
looks like , companies got there fundings again
pydry@reddit
There's an obvious concerted effort to push wages down with synchronized layoffs and more gaslighting about it.
Companies also seem to have almost completely lost the ability to recognize talent and are deeply insecure about it.
Outrageous-Ferret784@reddit
"call this a market for lemons"
I've been struggling with that for a long time. I demonstrate my stuff, and the instant reaction is "xyz can do the same". I check out product 'xyz' and it's using 1,000x as many tokens, and 55 minutes to solve the same task, after 15 rounds of prompting, that my stuff solves "out of the box" in 30 seconds.
Bakoro@reddit
They've never had the ability to recognize talent, and they've always been deeply insecure about it. Corporations, as a whole, have always had the idea that developers can be interchangeable cogs, and that development should be able to be streamlined like an assembly line.
Nearly every attempt to do that has failed, and they hate it.
Before 2008 especially, there was a such a dearth of software developers that it didn't even matter if you were talented or the bottom of the barrel, if you were even partially functional, you could easily get a job somewhere.
It was seriously so easy. If you could code, you had a job, guaranteed. If you had 3+ years of experience, then you could land a new job and be working in days. 5+ years of experience, and you had people cold calling you, trying to get you to swap companies. If you had any real ability, then you could be working at a big tech company, of a finances company, and be getting all those legendary perks.
A lot of those people were still bad at the job though, and made a lot of problems. The industry was in this shitty place, where they desperately needed laborers, and a larger portion of the labor pool was not good.
For a while they'd hire someone and train them, but then they didn't want to give raises, so the newly trained workers would bounce for a bigger paycheck.
The companies would offer bigger paychecks to new workers than they would for their existing labor, those developers saw that there was no loyalty and no extra rewards for good work, so the whole culture of "job hop for raises" thing began.
The corporations were still desperate for workers, but also terrified of hiring someone who wasn't already skilled, and were furious about how much developers were being paid.
The whole industry pushed the "learn to code" message, to politicians, to media, to schools.
Inexplicably, the industry also got rid of "entry level" jobs.
There are essentially no explicit entry level jobs anymore, "Junior" positions want 3+ years of experience. They only want people who can already do the job at a professional, high performing level.
A flood of kids and young adults went into CS on the promise of those big paychecks.
The people doing it for the money and who had no lover for computer science got degrees and/or certifications and flooded the job market. This put downward pressure on the "Junior" positions, and yet a lot of the labor pool was still bad. Trying to break into the industry has gotten wildly difficult, and you need extraordinary projects to differentiate yourself.
If you had 5+ years of experience, you were still golden. But over time, the bar has gotten higher, the list of demands for skills has grown wider, and the amount of job responsibilities has risen dramatically. Where there used to be a while team of developers, now there is one "full stack" developer.
Instead of gaining excellence and specialization, you're expected to know how to do everything, but also somehow be an expert in everything.
That shit only comes with a lot of time and experience, which you can only really get on the job.
So, over the years, the industry has been fighting over the same relatively small pool of very experienced people.
The industry has never developed any way to meaningfully detect a qualified candidate. Their only signal has ever been "has this person worked for another company for a while without getting fired?"
They keep trying Leetcode bullshit that has nothing to do with their company or the job responsibilities, and getting people who memorized toy problems, but who can't operate in a real environment.
The corporations don't want to take any risk, they don't want to deal with probationary periods, they don't want to deal with employment contracts, they don't want to invest in employees, they don't want to foot the bill for upskilling people...
Corporations are run by spoiled children who want a drop-in worker who will sit down on day one and be massively profitable. And they don't know how to pick those people.
There are more people than ever who "can code", and they have no way of telling who can actually be a good worker, and they still desperately cling to the idea that developers can be interchangeable cogs.
TracePoland@reddit
I disagree about the shift from dedicated teams to fullstack being bad. It may have been motivated by nefarious reasons but the you only touch REST APIs, meanwhile you only call them from your UI forced division was creating real productivity issues due to all the barriers and stakeholders needing to be aligned for even the simplest of changes. Fullstack paradigm broke down those barriers to a degree.
Bakoro@reddit
There is a world of difference between people never learning or touching anything outside their niche, and requiring that a person have mastery of 3 frontend frameworks, and also algorithms, and also databases, and also cyber security, and also infrastructure and networking, and also systems administration, and now also training AI models and the integrating AI/ML into things. Oh yeah, you're also your own QA.
I'd expect people to know fundamentals, but it's not reasonable to expect on person to have all of those skills at a professional level.
Anyone who claims that they can do all of that at an expert level is a liar or delusional.
The idea that it should all be everyone's responsibility because it's "software development" is absurd. At the very least, companies need dedicated cyber security people. The amount of massive data leaks that happen on a regular basis speaks for itself.
Physical-Pudding6607@reddit
Most painful part is when these "grifters" are interviewing you and you just scream inside, asking: wtf is going on?
Dromeo@reddit
Wonderfully said! That felt like a great retrospective on the industry.
Do you have a blog by any chance? I like your writing style.
s-mores@reddit
I mean, corporations and doing a good job have always been more coincidences and legacy effort than actual intent.
max123246@reddit
Wow, you just summed up every problem I have with the industry. I really hoped as the industry matured it would head towards the right direction but AI has ruined that hope. Now companies never have to train their workers or invest in their career growth, they'll just slop out code until their prod explodes and they'll go "however could this happen!" and layoffs tens of thousands of people who never had a choice in the matter
pawsibility@reddit
It's funny, I was just thinking earlier, "man, there are so many grifters in tech these days," it's genuinely annoying. I had to go read the Wikipedia entry for a lemon market, since I wasn't familiar.
It seems like you're arguing that in this instance, the sellers are job-seekers (selling their skills), and the buyers are companies that cannot discern a quality candidate from a poor candidate... that's where the core information asymmetry lies. What an interesting conclusion to draw as well: the quality engineers will just leave the market entirely and go do something else.
Maybe we need lemon laws for corporations? Although giving even more handouts/handicaps to big corps feels like the wrong move in my gut.
aoeudhtns@reddit
I hate certifications, but I think eventually we'll probably want to regulate software engineering (and it's fair to distinguish SWE from other forms of development) the way we regulate other capital-E engineers to help guarantee quality.
I know there isn't universal agreement on the terms, but I break it down like
Or something like that.
gimpwiz@reddit
One interesting thing that I should note is that capital-E engineers, the kind with a PE, have the authority (and take on the risk) of stamping plans. Really important stuff when dealing with risk to life and safety. Your bridges and roads, your nuclear reactors and your bioreactors, your government certifications... all stamped by a Professional Engineer.
But the people doing (eg) consumer electronics hardly ever bother. You build a smartphone, very few people on the effort are Engineers.
Now if we relate that to programming, it's kind of similar, you know? Like 1% of programmers of any sort create the underlying tools that everyone uses that really need to be correct or we're all screwed. Compilers, operating systems, encryption libraries, yknow, they have bugs sure but generally they're really quite robust and quite good and if they disappear then we're all screwed. The other 99% of people are either doing business logic, front-ends and user interfaces, moving data around, doing video games, etc. If we look analogously to EE for example, most of these folks would never bother getting or need to get a professional license. (That's a big if.) Ironically it should also be noted that the Professional Engineer who stamps plans for an electrical substation probably earns a lot less money than the guy working on live auction advertisement delivery even though the former is crucially important to society and the latter might actually be making it worse.
notyouravgredditor@reddit
Civil and occasionally Mechanical Engineers are the only ones I know that bother with a PE.
I'm a Chemical Engineer. A PE never even crossed my mind.
gimpwiz@reddit
My friend's a chemical engineer, and a PE. Bioreactors.
EEs get PEs for power engineering, especially working in municipal/state governments for power generation and distribution. Think about who stamps all the plans for the things that get electricity to your house.
In the consumer electronics space which is what I assume you're thinking of, some of the compliance focused work needs a PE as well. Some of that is going away though, eg, this
aoeudhtns@reddit
I largely agree, but my nit here is that cybersecurity and data breaches affect a huge variety of industries. From restaurant rewards programs to health records in hospitals. Cybersecurity may not be life or death the way a bridge is, but it has far-reaching ramifications. CrowdStrike bringing down the global economy for hours. The multi-billion dollar cybercriminal industry. I was thinking less about PEs and more the general career systems in traditional engineering that have matured enough to create certification pathways. The ones we have in our industry currently are pretty dubious and come more often from rent-seekers than standard-bearers.
And for the fields where we do have analogues in software - medical devices, vehicular, avionics, train firmware and control systems, utility control and management systems, etc. - we still don't have any kind of professional engineering certifications there. Classic example is the famous Therac-25 incident. Yet there's still no Software Systems PE mechanism to sign off that an implementation or design should be safe.
More and more of the world is becoming software. Even cars are becoming less mechanical and more software very rapidly. I think the need will continue to grow.
gimpwiz@reddit
Yeah we agree, I specifically brought up encryption libraries as the sort of underpinnings that all society relies on these days, these things are indeed safety-critical. And I don't exaggerate. Governments use standard encryption libraries; breaches from other state actors can mean things like downed, or even physically damaged infrastructure, with lives at stake.
To me the difficulty in a certification or license is the question of "the right way" to do something or the "guaranteed to work" design. Allow me to elaborate.
Picture that I am a structural engineer working in residential development. I expect my drawings to be brought to life by a series of trades, and each trade is going to want direct, simple, and obvious drawings. In most cases (read: absent architects doing crazy stuff) if someone wants to build this section here, there is a Standard Accepted Way to do it that everyone knows. As an example, you come to me to build a garage. What is the standard operating procedure? Soils report and geotechnical analysis. Local code book. Then I tell you, okay, you are going to do a 12"x12" perimeter footing on a 3" lift of compacted gravel, one foot stem wall all the way around except the front where the garage door goes. #4 bar 8"oc with 12" overlaps. J-bolts at these places. 4" slump concrete road mix number two, this batch plant knows what that is. Slab can be 4" thick over 3" base, same #4 rebar but 18"oc. Then you need the three sides to be 16"oc stud walls, you need 4x6 posts here, here, here, here, and here, and double post here. Header will be a 4x14" glulam. You need to use these, these, and these straps in these places. We're doing windows here and here, man door here, I want them framed with two jacks and two kings and these headers. Standard 5/8" sheathing for shear across the whole thing. Ridge beam is 4x12 glulam, and you're doing a 5/12 pitch with these storage trusses. And basically every trade involved knows exactly what that means and how to do it, and any inspector can inspect it. The details are all pretty much out of a set of large reference tables, "given this area, with this wind load, this snow load, code requires this live load and this dead load" ... And a lot of the trades are experienced enough that if you made a mistake they can call it out and say boss this doesn't look right. This makes it relatively straightforward to test that the licensed engineer generally knows how to do stuff and it makes it relatively straightforward to stamp a plan, because in most cases what's being built is the same exact thing as everyone else in the county is doing, and there's a hundred projects active right now doing it the same way, more or less, and you can ask the city for the permits and drive around and see them doing work (well, they may not actually let you onto the job site, but you know.)
Now as a programmer, someone asks you to do something really simple. I want a login page to my small-traffic website. Really simple stuff.
Is there one standard recommendation you could make this person? I would say no. You need to figure out what kind of host they have, what options they offer in terms of tools... languages, databases, etc. Ask ten programmers and you'll get twelve responses for what tools to even start with. And the resultant code is going to look pretty different if you're using PHP+MySQL versus Node.js. You can't just pick any other programmer off the street and ask them to inspect the work, let alone get them to agree that this is a good standard approach that has no real issues with it - you'll just get people arguing back and forth for days about how PHP is an outdated dinosaur built on a series of critically poor judgment calls and terrible security practices or about how Node.js is the stupidest possible way of hosting a server because it's obvious that it's a hammer designed for people who've only ever seen hammers before and refuse to learn literally any other tool to get their work done.
In order to have a PE for software I think we would need to figure out how to make "standard problem-solving" programming more of a trade and less of an art. Like obviously if you're going to build a 100-foot cathedral you're not just hiring Johnny the guy who only knows how to frame 16oc stud walls, and if you're writing a compiler it's not going to be a trade. But if you're making a login form for a small-traffic website... it certainly could be a trade. But it isn't.
Caveat though is that trades tend to get paid less than programmers, unless they run their own business. If you can actually turn "standard problem-solving" into a trade, you're back to talking about trade unions and trying to regulate / legislate / socially pressure the buyers of labor into what sort of thing they can build and how and with whom as the workers. Which is occasionally a popular idea here, but most programmers aren't into it.
k1v1uq@reddit
Small correction: capital buys labor time (more precise: the ability to do labor). Because if they bought actual labor, they wouldn't make profits. When they buy just your time, they own everything you make during that time, minus your fixed hourly rate.
That's why employed people like Jeff Dean and Sanjay Ghemawat, while comparably wealthy, are still many orders of magnitudes away from the likes of Sergey Brin.
While this creates immense opportunities for the capital side to accumulate wealth it also creates deep mistrust in their workforce. Because both sides operate under an intrinsic conflict of interests. Workers want to minimize work, capital wants to maximize work. They are essentially enemies.
gimpwiz@reddit
I guess I'll bite, I don't know what you mean by buying "actual labor." I'm curious what you see as the distinction.
sysop073@reddit
I think they mean businesses don't buy what you make, they buy your time and then tell you what to do during that time. Nobody has ever referred to that as "buying labor" before, so I don't know what the point of the pedantry is, and the assumption that "they wouldn't make profits" only makes sense in a world where everyone pays the same amount for every product, which is very much not this world.
BubbleRose@reddit
I'm guessing they mean time vs output? I'd consider "labour" to be time-based by default but it's my best guess.
pawsibility@reddit
Great response! Just some thoughts...
I would kind of say that there is though? It's largely agreed upon these days that some flavor of JWTs in
HttpOnlycookies proxied via a backend server is the recommended way of doing auth these days, right? You might be using NextJS, or PHP, or Python/Django, but the overall idea is the same. And to that point:I get what you're saying, and I think it actually is a trade. You say it isn't a trade, but it sort of feels like it is, right? The programmers' "100-foot cathedral" isn't a login form... it's new compilers, algorithms, and frameworks that push the boundaries of what's possible in software. Johnny who is "framing 16oc stud walls" is the equivalent of building CRUD dashboards and login forms. Grunt-work thats being done by AI and LLM's and going through commoditization.
(not trying to be argumentative, genuinely discussing for the sake of discussing to expand my view)
gimpwiz@reddit
I haven't done websites other than my own little site in ages, thank god, but I don't even know what JWTs are, so I might be the equivalent of the "I've been doing this for 20 years sonny, I know what I'm about" "Well old man, you've been doing it wrong for 20 years" meme.
aoeudhtns@reddit
Your whole response here was excellent. Echoes a lot of thoughts that have knocked around in my own brain box.
I don't have much to add, other than that I'm thinking in the "long term" and "eventually" framework and not so much the "take immediate action to effect change" mentality on thoughts leaning this way. That this is possibly a place we'll get to, some day.
It's hard to imagine that there's going to be another Internet & web UI type revolution. And similarly, when you can choose between on prem/leased bare metal <-> virtualization <-> software defined DC (i.e. cloud) it's hard to imagine that there's going to be a 4th option that wouldn't be able to reuse popular tools & techniques of today.
I always remind myself that our industry really kicked off in the 60s (sure we can argue it's older, but that's an inflection point) and many of these others have been around since early history, in various forms.
gimpwiz@reddit
Yeah, the newness of the industry is true, people have been building roads and walls for thousands of years, people have been building digital logic since, at the earliest, some time around the first mechanical calculators ish. People have been building actual computers since the 50s, using them outside of research and military purposes since maybe the early 60s, and using them conveniently for an individual since the 70s. Fifty years versus five thousand.
And if you think about the process for building a road, or framing a wall, or anything else that is even remotely "standard," millions of man-hours have gone into simplifying that process. People have iterated countless times on how to solve the problem of "how do I get ten men with shovels and hammers, or concrete trucks and pumps, or cranes and welders, to build more or less the same thing every time I ask them to build the same thing?" Whereas for programming, it's sometimes hard to get people to even accept that they should use a standard library for encryption or for date-times versus rolling their own.
I think it's also important to note that it's very hard to imagine a revolution of what we do or how we do it, because it's... revolutionary! Hah. So many things you look back and say "duh" but only with hind-sight.
DiggyTroll@reddit
NCEES launched a PE exam for Software Engineering in 2013, then shuttered it in 2019. Until they retire, you will still find these bona fide software PEs working in Medical, Aerospace, and other fields where safety is critical
aoeudhtns@reddit
I did not know. Thank you for that information. And: huh, interesting.
pawsibility@reddit
Isnt this what LeetCode is supposed to be? And I think most people here would argue being able to grind leet code is a poor predictor of a quality engineer…
Not disagreeing just genuinely wondering
aoeudhtns@reddit
I can see why you might say that. But no.
LeetCode does not really get into:
etc. etc.
Basically LeetCode is "were you paying attention in algorithms class" and/or "have you crammed on LeetCode." and ignores most of what SWEs do.
For example, I get asked: "can you deliver a 99.9% up solution for X at Y scale within a 1 mil operating budget." I do not get asked "can you find all the matching parenthesis in this string."
roodammy44@reddit
Agreed, this is what everyone fails to understand about AI too. It does leetcode (mostly) fine, but does nothing of the other stuff.
And now given we have only interviewed based on leetcode no-one knows what to do any more.
HommeMusical@reddit
In over 40 years in the industry, I have given several hundred interviews at least, and people seem to like my work, on both sides. (One guy said, "You really put a good face on it, but I know I am not getting this job. But this was the most fun I ever had in an interview." I told him he was a good candidate and if this wasn't Google during the 00s, he'd have likely gotten the job. I hope things went well for him!)
I never give l33tcod3 questions, because they show you nothing. What I do is have a chat about some general aspect of computing, and then start drilling into parts, and then I say things like, "Can you give a quick sketch of how this would be done?"
I also do what I call "adaptive interviewing". If people fumble questions, I give them easier questions; if they do well, I give them harder questions. I explain this to people too, and I say, "So don't worry if you miss some questions, because it's almost certain."
I remember once a young man who had a very promising résumé but was so paralyzed with fear that he couldn't function. We had to reject him because he delivered nothing in three interviews, all three of the interviewers were upset. Poor bastard.
Giving people a question that they can get after a failure allows nervous candidate to recover their balance. Several times I had candidate who fell on their faces out of the gate, I backed off and chatted, and then brought on more stuff and this time they aced it, and we hired them and they worked out.
Kok_Nikol@reddit
This is me on live coding interviews.
I get paralyzed, forget all I know.
One interview they said the session will be recorded and reviewed by a panel, and I just refused, even though I liked the company.
Any advice for us idiots?
HommeMusical@reddit
I can totally sympathize, because I acquired this same characteristic later in life, can you fscking believe? I used to be fearless! (Well, not fearless really, but you know.)
I do have some suggestions for you.
I don't generally recommend pharma, and I don't do this personally, but beta blockers are great for exactly your problem, because they suppress the physical part of the anxiety without doping your brain. For example, many concert pianists use beta blockers to reduce stage fright.
You can't party on beta blockers, and they have few negative side effects, so doctors will give out prescriptions pretty freely, for exactly this purpose, or community mental health centers with limited prescribing rights too.
If you go this route, I recommend getting a prescription of 20 pills, and "practicing" - that is to say, taking a beta blocker and doing some hard, timed test. The first couple of times you take it, you will feel a bit sleepy but you get past that quickly, I am told.
My friend was suffering from exactly this interview terror issue, so he took some meds, and got me to play interviewer with him a few times. At his request, I deliberately made it a bit nastier each time, started doing slightly malicious things like interrupting him or throwing in new conditions. He lost his temper at me once for interrupting him several times, and then we both laughed!
(If you can learn to laugh at this all, you will be happier. I mean, there you are, a big skinbag of mostly water with a bunch of moving parts, made up of the ashes of a supernova, walking into these little rooms to solve bizarre logic problems in order to get food and shelter! Your cave man ancestor would just bust a gut at you. "I had to hunt antelopes and get stalked by leopards, you effete punk!" :-D )
He also started doing leetcode problems with talk radio and the TV on loudly as well. If it was too, too much he'd turn it down a bit, but then turn it up a bit later.
His idea was to get used to it. From hearing his reports of his interviews, I think it has worked for him.
You might not have someone to be a bit sadistic to you, but you can turn on a lot of noise and ask a friend to come in a various times and interrupt you unexpectedly or close the lid on your machine.
The idea is to treat the frustration as a source of amusement, and learn to smile and keep working.
Here are some mental tricks of mine that work.
Breathing control is always good. It just baffles me that this isn't taught to all kids. I'd taught it to people in pain several times, and then one day I fell into a hole in Bali, dislocating my shoulder and putting a big hole in my leg, and I managed to stay completely calm and communicate in Indonesian. (I ended up perfectly fine. I had to wait for the orthopedic surgeon, and I sang long, quiet tones and the doctors were very approving. In New York City, doctors chuckle a bit if you do that, though they never complain, because it's a lot better than screaming.)
I have had many dozens of interviews, and given many hundreds of them. There's a huge level of randomness in interviewing, and not all of this randomness by any means is in the interviewee! Two different interviewers can get an entirely different picture of the same perfectly competent engineer.
If you think of each interview as a lottery ticket, one that you are likely to lose anyway, then it's no big deal if you do in fact lose it. This deprioritizes the importance of the interview, as it should, because few interviews are really life-changing unless you're at or near the peak - getting that CTO job or something.
Another thing that helps me deprioritizing the interview is to think of really bad things that can go wrong and say, "I'd much rather fail the interview than [actually horrible thing]". This is a bit morbid so who knows if it works for anyone else.
None of this job shit is really important. People, health, art and music and science and learning in general, the natural world and the biosphere, these are the important things. Some job is just a job. Yes, eventually without a job there will be negative consequences, but remember, it's a lottery, and tickets are everywhere and the odds aren't terrible. You crank through the motion.
I play a Japanese board game called Go. I got to a medium level years ago and I don't advance because I tend to play the most exciting move over the best move, and I do that because I don't care that much when I lose.
Push the job into this abstract, formal category of a game where you systematically play to win, but don't get so bent out of shape if you lose, and you might be ahead of the game.
The ultimate step in this, "depersonalization" is a trick that works for me and others but it's also associated with various mental illnesses, illnesses which I certainly do not have (because I have the opposite issues, not because I'm fully baked! :-D) but many people do, so there's a little risk.
The idea is to reframe the irrational and negative emotions away from happening to you personally, but to your body, which is often mostly correct. Timothy Leary used to refer to "the robot" in a similar way - "The robot is hungry." "The robot is experiencing a great deal of stress these days."
I had panic attacks for a while, due to my first and still worst hostile workplace (and boy, was it hostile), but I would reframe these as, "My body is experiencing a panic attack," and indeed most of the symptoms are physiological, and this allowed me to stand back a bit and watch the effects with some clinical dispassion. I never got to the point I could laugh at the panic, but I could at least gain a measure of detachment. I was still not functioning well but at least I didn't thrash around.
But I have a pretty good ego, and I used to have a massive ego, so there was no real risk of long-term depersonalization, which is a bit nasty. YMMV, be a little careful with this, you know yourself better than anyone!
Good luck, and I hope one or more of these are useful!
roodammy44@reddit
I thoroughly enjoyed this comment, thank you. I am only 20 years in, and have given perhaps 50 interviews and taken 25. And I still get stressed out to the point where sometimes I fail. But your point about deciding you will fail so it doesn't matter either way has worked really well.
I haven't mastered depersonalisation though, kinda crazy you could do it during injuries and panic attacks. I had panic attacks at my last job (asshole leader and layoff induced performance anxiety) and I can't imagine separating my mind from the state of my body.
Kudos on writing a comment this size 10 layers deep into a random story!
Bush-Men209@reddit
The interview-lottery point rings true to me too, because I have seen perfectly capable people freeze in artificial settings and then do steady, thoughtful work once they are actually on a team.
HommeMusical@reddit
Hey, if it does even one person some good in an interview, it's a big positive for the world.
I fscking hate panic and fear. Hate hate hate hate it. So if I can squash even one panic cockroach, it's a big win for me!!
nonsense1989@reddit
You are the wise sage colleague that i wish every software engineers have.... Thank you for your posts
HommeMusical@reddit
It's the very least I can do. I was very lucky to have decades in the glory period of computer programming.
I have a very clear memory from around forty years ago. (Forty years, how the fsck did that happen?! I don't feel that different, I still do the same things!)
I was in my university in a stairwell with my friend Cliff Harris (who I have been trying to locate for quite a while since he vanished off social media, I miss you, buddy!) and we were discussion whether CASE, Computer Aided Software Engineering (a buzzword at the time), was going to eat our jobs.
I thought about this over the years, and laughed. But here we are.
So I feel insanely lucky. Anything I can do to help people out is simply trying to rectify this huge imbalance.
gc3@reddit
Theres a club, I toastmasters, for public speaking
missymissy2023@reddit
Toastmasters probably helps with the panic part, but live coding still sucks because being watched while narrating half-baked thoughts is basically the opposite of how most people actually work.
gc3@reddit
I must be non human I am always talking to myself as I figure out problems
Zalack@reddit
Practice public speaking. One of the biggest benefits I got from DMing a DnD group was learning how to embrace and enjoy performing in front of a group, even though I often start uncontrollably shaking while doing it.
It taught me how to tune out the fear my body was experiencing. Like anything in life it’s a skill you can practice.
jbmsf@reddit
I remember interviewing a candidate with a terrible stutter. He was unlikely to get the job, but it was easy enough to switch to interview over chat (at least before the current era) and give him an interview that he wouldn't fail outright.
GlobalCurry@reddit
I guess proper certification could be an answer to leetcode because it would be a professional board created list of things someone needs to know and be able to do to be minimally successful at their job. Leetcode is not that and doesn't optimize for good engineers.
Days_End@reddit
Sure and I've had to work with linked list maybe 5 times in the last two decades but I've never met a decent engineer who can't do basic "LeetCode" and is decent at other aspects of software engineering. Reddit of course claims there are huge swaths of them but every single time I've ok'd someone who was a bit iffy on the "LeetCode" I've been burned.
Kok_Nikol@reddit
I have to disagree. Day to day stuff is not about being fast and clever.
-alloneword-@reddit
I have an engineering degree and have been out of full-time employment for several years now - though have spent much of that time working on publishing my own app ecosystem.
I have been actively in the job market for the past 9 months or so and it is pretty brutal. My Computer Engineering degree seems to confuse a lot of recruiters. I also have more experience (> 20 years) than what recruiters are use to seeing, and it seems they don't know how to react to the fact that I might actually be older than the manager hiring me.
My experience is mostly in native app development and streaming media - and there is currently not a lot of growth in that market compared to pre-covid (or so it seems).
CT-2497@reddit
Im of the same opinion. Especially with the direction the world is going and how more invasive companies are being in regards to personal data, certifications would be the way to make sure everyone knows what they’re doing and also make those people hard to replace.
civildisobedient@reddit
The simplest solution is to go back to in-person interviews.
pawsibility@reddit
Yeah. Another angle to this is AI-slop resumes drowning AI-slop ATS systems for recruiting. Anecdotally, I've heard it's near-impossible to hire in the US right now... my company has been looking for someone in SF of all places and just keeps getting dud after dud. People who claim one thing on their resume and show up only to just absolutely bomb. Real candidates with real skills then want to be paid 500K/yr because they see the crazy salaries out of Anthropic and OpenAI, when in reality those roles go to hot-off-the-press PhD's from CMU/MIT.
Just delusion on all fronts, really, and nobody knows what's real and what's AI slop. Further credence to the lemon market and people just reacting to it altogether and driving us towards more in-person interaction (which I think is a good thing).
Kitty-XV@reddit
If the only people who have the set skills you need cost X dollars, then what is the current cost of labor. All the people applying for cheaper who don't have skills is creating the impression you can get it cheaper, but that doesn't change what those with skills are demanding.
Think of it like a buyer of electronics instead of labor. If I want some electrical gadget to do X, I can find many low costing options on Wish, Alabama, and even cheap options on Amazon. But they don't work. There are good options sold by reputable vendors, but they are unrealistically demanding 10 times the price or more.
As a shopper, we realize that the real unrealistic behavior is expecting the good products to sell for knock off prices and the buyer in the above situation, not the seller, is the one with off expectations.
Granted, there can also just be no market. If the job isn't interested in someone for what they really cost, they might prefer the position unfilled. If I want a Switch 2 at $100 at most and Nintendo is selling for $400 at lowest, then there isn't a market for me to buy one, regardless of how many Swatch 2s are on Alibaba for $20?
pawsibility@reddit
Love this perspective thank you. I think I largely agree… I was trying to argue that it feels that, simultaneously, companies think they can get perfectly good switch 2’s for $50 while Nintendo thinks it’s perfectly fine to sell them for $1000.
Many times we find the right candidate with the right skills for a role, only for them to ask for outlandish salaries. People who are ok working for the salary posted usually don’t have any skills to begin with…
Feels like there needs to be a meet in the middle? Companies can’t expect wages to be what they were even 5 years ago with current inflation/prices, but candidates also need to understand not everyone is the next Ilya Sustekever at OpenAI
EveryQuantityEver@reddit
If those real candidates with real skills are getting those offers, then it sounds like your company is paying too little.
That, and not embracing remote work is a huge mistake
k1v1uq@reddit
the end of zero-interest
Quexth@reddit
An equivalent function already exists.
There is the probation period to let go of employees that are "lemons".
Thus, the cost of hiring a "lemon" is the cost of extended recruitment and the opportunity cost of not hiring someone more competent sooner.
Even those can be helped with proper recruitment processes. I also would not be surprised if there is networking between companies to rate employees.
TempleDank@reddit
It is funny, at my company they hired a senior that was obviously a lemon, dude took 11 working days to set up his local dev environment, despite having everything well documented... It took the company 4 months after his provation period to fire him. I know from month 1 that he was a grifter... F100 company btw
redblack_tree@reddit
11 days to set up Dev? Geez, what are you guys running, AS400 locally?
TempleDank@reddit
No man haha, just react and spring boot app. A junior tipically takes 2h to set up
The-WideningGyre@reddit
I see this happen all the time, unfortunately. The higher up you go, the longer it seems to take, and the more damage the person has to do. I think part of it hoping it will turn out, and allowing more ramp-up. I think another part is it requires more senior people to admit they made a mistake, and take on the work of finding someone new -- so they wait until it's really awful. Finally, it's also just tough and confrontational, so most people don't want to do it.
Still, it's stunning to me how much damage gets done, when if leadership was willing to just ask people working closely by the person, they'd typically have a clear answer quite early on.
HommeMusical@reddit
This is a practice that has zero value to a company, advantages their competitors, and leaves it liable to a lawsuit.
MrDeebus@reddit
That's the cost of hiring a lemon, but not the cost of making it visible that you hired a lemon. By helping the lemon put on a good mask for the first year or so, a manager can avoid bearing the costs and make it the problem of whoever ends up with them after the next reorg, which is always going to happen within 5-6 quarters or so anyway.
Waterwoo@reddit
Lemon laws for that already exist, they're called at will employment.
RCo1a@reddit
This would explain why there are more contract to hire positions than actual full time positions in the market.
backfire10z@reddit
The US basically has a lemon law called “at-will employment”
pydry@reddit
Yes, unless there is a clear, non gamifiable way to distinguish slop from non slop then the slop wins by default even though it's worse.
Automatic_Tailor_598@reddit
Grifters in tech === people with MBA degrees. It’s a liberal arts degree for liars. Heres the average MBA course syllabus.
- accounting 1000.
- accounting -1000: ~~lying~~ optimizing financial reporting structures
- ~~making fake friends by being fake~~ strategic networking.
- how to ~~manipulate them~~ leverage their opportunity
- how to ~~lie about~~ believe in your product to ~~dupe~~ capitalize on ~~greedy idiots~~ market instability
- ~~denying personal responsibility for your choices 1000~~ having a success-driven mindset
- ~~denying personal responsibility for your choices 2000~~ maintaining shareholder confidence
- ~~manipulating the public 1000~~ marketing
- ~~manipulating the public 2000~~ public relations
- growth requires ~~unethical choices and lawbreaking~~ sacrifice: ~~who to sacrifice~~ managing human capital
- ~~Coping~~ navigating ~~with your guilt~~ success.
- ~~bribery~~ lobbying
- ~~buzzwords 1000~~ thought leadership.
Capitalism isnt inherently bad. We just made it that way.
snlacks@reddit
Jokes on them, I have multiple friends who gave up on software development. While anecdotal, the burn out factor of dealing with this nonsense is high. I thrive on it, but I feel for sane people
PrivilegedPatriarchy@reddit
This is an incredibly boring economics take. The entire history of human economic development has been an effort in driving wages (the labor cost of goods and services) as close to zero as possible. This is a good thing, and we should actively pursue lower and lower costs of labor. This means cheaper goods for you and me, and it's how we've been able to develop the immense, unimaginable global wealth we have today. We can only hope it continues.
EveryQuantityEver@reddit
No. No tech company is passing “savings” on to consumers.
PrivilegedPatriarchy@reddit
Right, that's why we have immense access to all manners of software and tech at cheaper prices than ever.
SCP-iota@reddit
In a competitive market, that would be correct, but in an oligopoly, it just leads to higher corporate profits and prices don't really change much. The current tech market is an oligopoly. It needs more competition for the effects you're mentioning to happen.
purple-lemons@reddit
Well thank god we had the forsight to unionise when things were good and we had all the power, with the knowledge that it would be arogant to assume our individual level of skill would insulate us from broad market and economic shifts... wait we did the opposite of that? Fiddlesticks.
s-mores@reddit
Crab bucket mentality.
purple-lemons@reddit
Don't see how unionising for the purpose of collective bargaining in any way pulls other downs
EveryQuantityEver@reddit
They’re crabs in a bucket
EntroperZero@reddit
Not just talent, value. The two obviously go hand in hand, but I believe it's because the execs focus so much more on number go up this quarter than on creating value. If you don't even want to create value, then you don't need talent.
EmmitSan@reddit
Have you hired recently? It is crazy times. It’s a vast sea of fraud right now. Fake resumes, fake identities, people using ai avatars, state actors, you name it.
Yes, mist of it is identifiable, but the sheer time one wastes wading through it all, oof
It’s not easy to “identify talent”. It never was, but it’s way worse now.
Asleep-Vanilla1457@reddit
Just use an Agent to review candidates, conduct interviews and make hiring decisions. What could go wrong?
spareminuteforworms@reddit
I've said this across multiple platforms including meatspace: HR are really the biggest fucking retards you could find on the planet. They have completely fucked up the hiring process and only get in the way of hiring by the teams directly impacted.
4xi0m4@reddit
The data makes a compelling case, but I wonder if the picture varies significantly by region and specialty. In LATAM where I work, the dynamics are quite different from the US market. Some friends in AI/ML are seeing strong demand, while traditional web dev roles are more competitive. Would be interesting to see a breakdown by technology stack.
Luckey_711@reddit
Like in almost any other aspect we follow trends much later here in LATAM in comparison to the US/Europe, so while there may be demand for AI/ML engineers right now I'd expect it to decrease in the upcoming months, specially since most companies here (unless they are branches of already well established companies) do not have an spending power even remotely close for greenfield projects
twaddington@reddit
Fascinating
placid-gradient@reddit
oh I know this one! we ... make lemonade?
barnabytheplumber@reddit
"Companies also seem to have almost completely lost the ability to recognize talent and are deeply insecure about it.
I've never seen so many grifters in tech (especially at C level) who have no clue what they are doing.
The worst part is that it's become harder to signal competence in this environment coz the people holding the purse strings are now dumber and the signals they used to rely upon no longer function."
These are my feelings too. At every company you interview at for a technical role, the first person you talk to is from HR, or a screening person. This non-technical person, I'm sure, becomes the most important and influential person you will talk to in the chain, as their job is to just chop off the majority of people applying for the role. And yet in my experience, this non-technical person will gladly tell you that they have no idea what they're talking about, and that they have no idea or ability to distinguish between a competent programmer and an incompetent one.
So then why are we all doing hiring this way? Why has no one bothered to question why we're giving so much hiring power to people that have no idea what they're doing?
Kok_Nikol@reddit
Dude, I thought I was going crazy! I could not figure out what some people did after months.
And it's not one of those "oh big company" things, like I heard them in meetings, I'm in some email threads, these people just coast and spew bullshit, and (some) get paid a lot.
SpaceToaster@reddit
These also a bunch of people founding “startups” with a sr and jr dev and complaining that they have “no velocity and are moving too slow”
TikiTDO@reddit
It doesn't help that in many cases the "sr dev" is a "jr dev + 4 years of experience"
Mrgluer@reddit
lemonade?
RationalDialog@reddit
Exactly. Same with return to office policies. it's all about power and tech workers got too powerful during COVID,
No_Feedback6037@reddit
Amen
levelofamazement10@reddit
that's great news!
Daxon@reddit
25 year senior SWE here having trouble finding work. First time in my life I haven't had multiple options lined up. I keep a spreadsheet of job applications and when I hit about 250 applications I stopped tracking.
Granted, I live in a small town so I'm remote-only, but I can't help but feel as if LLMs are impacting me personally.
Just a single data point, so take that for what it's worth.
PS: anyone need a senior SWE?
Spunelli@reddit
omfg, same.. except i have 14 years experience. I just apply into the abyss and for the lulz. My spreadsheet is up to 300. I've noticed jobs that i applied to a month ago have taken down the listing and reposted it but... haven't gone through applicants?! Cause mine is still 'under review'.
EmeraldCrusher@reddit
The real problem is when you get that interview... They're looking for unicorns for the price of donkeys.
Spunelli@reddit
Yep. Here's my latest 2 rejection feedbacks:
Not being interested in reporting when my recruiter already discussed this with the VP and he said that was fine. My supervisor rejected me on this piece. Along with I had an issue with after hours deployments and after hours job monitoring. When the reality was that my supervisor couldn't explain a structure and expectations around the after hours need. No on call rotation, apparently. We are supposed to willy nilly check before bed. Lolkbye this job is still open, btw. 2 months later. Their documentation is on a shared one note notebook. They wanted an Azure dev but aren't even using Azure. Not even for tickets. They are using some third party shenanigans that I have never heard of.
Did not have GCP. I do however have the equivalent of what they are asking in BOTH Azure and AWS. I pushed back and asked for more feedback because no one in their right mind would reject a candidate for having 2 of the three cloud platforms. I'm still waiting for a response.
zynasis@reddit
As someone who has done a lot of recruitment; they ain’t that equivalent. There’s a lot of similar concepts but the nuance in their implementation and quirks is very different.
If I’m hiring for AWS infra for instance, I definitely ain’t taking someone with only Azure experience.
crazyeddie123@reddit
You would if the market wasn't completely fucked
zynasis@reddit
Ok it’s the market that’s wrong…
cake-day-on-feb-29@reddit
I know that even on-site job listings get spammed with thousands of applicants, remote jobs must be far worse. Even for local listings we get tons and tons of applications from people outside of the US, despite every indication that we cannot get them a visa or anything like that....
mastarija@reddit
Could this be an issue due to your age? A lot of people are simply discriminatory towards older people in IT, and your age might coincide with this AI hype, so it's not really clear what's the real cause of what you're experiencing.
JarredMack@reddit
Don't forget all the big companies are still using AI as a smokescreen for mass layoffs, which not only floods the market with experienced developers looking for a new job, but spooks the rest of the market out of hiring because they have to copy what the big companies do.
We're just in the modern day offshoring cycle where all the big companies are trying to force wages down, and will then need to mass recruit to backfill all the brain drain they created doing so
Flashy-Anteater-1664@reddit
Flare up before the mass layoff. It has been like that always.
Clear_Ad_1314@reddit
so goood
yuvraj__jha@reddit
Interesting data point. The narrative swing from AI replacing devs to AI creating more dev work is happening because:
Quality over quantity matters now more than ever. Companies realizing vibe-coded solutions are not sustainable is a net positive for the industry.
programming-ModTeam@reddit
No content written mostly by an LLM. If you don't want to write it, we don't want to read it.
Memoir-cli@reddit
what a relief!
TikiTDO@reddit
It's like the rest of us have been saying... Nonstop... For years now.
AI is a tool. Tools are difficult to use. It takes time to get good at new tools. If you want to stay in this field, you should take this time to learn the new tools of your profession while they're brand new, because nobody is going to care that you thought that AI was the devil in the mid-2020s. Come 2030, if you don't understand how to use AI as a software engineer... Well... You won't be a software engineer.
EveryQuantityEver@reddit
No. There really is no evidence whatsoever to support your claims.
And if these tools really were as good as you claim, they wouldn’t need to be mandated
TikiTDO@reddit
What? There's plenty of evidence that some people are able to get amazing results. There's just also plenty of evidence that a whole lot of people get terrible results. This aligns with what I've been saying. It's a skill issue, and most people are bad at this entirely new technology that's appeared in their lives all of a sudden. This isn't a critique of people, it's just an observation that this is all big and complex.
The entire point of tools is they are only as amazing as the skills of the person using the tools. What we can see right now is most people don't use the tools well, and as a result most people get very poor results.
The reason companies have to mandate the tools is they are all hoping someone figures out a great way to use them, which can then spread to others.
Jameswa@reddit
I don’t know why these people are downvoting you; you’re 100% correct. They’re already being left behind
TikiTDO@reddit
A lot of people on reddit just follow along with the crowd. If their favourite youtuber or insta infuencer says "AI is bad" then it must be bad.
In turn, a lot of youtubers have noticed that if you talk all sorts of shit about AI, then it's easy to get people to pay attention to you. People are afraid and unsure of what's coming at them, so they latch onto the people that tell them it will all be fine. The alternative is they lose their viewers to influencers that are more willing to pander. It's a bit of a self-propagating cycle of people that are constantly falling behind, but who don't want to confront this reality.
Meanwhile, most people that do understand AI aren't really interested in talking on reddit. Most interaction on this site is some variant of argument or disagreement, often with people that don't know much about the topic. It takes a person with very... peculiar tastes when it comes to arguments... to find this enjoyable over the years.
HommeMusical@reddit
I actually used punch cards to write programs!, a long time ago.
So I can tell you for sure that your comparison isn't close to accurate. The big reason is this: everyone hated punch cards, absolutely everyone. (Only punch tape was worse, and that was because an error could destroy the entire paper tape, FFS!)
The moment we had a choice, everyone, absolutely everyone, switched. People would show up at 2AM for one of the limited number of terminals rather than use cards.
For me, the one and only argument against AI is the bad quality of the results. I was just amazed the first time I asked an LLM to write a program, using only English, and almost instantly it put out a not-terrible program that did the thing I had asked.
But soon I realized that cleaning up common issues and footguns that I would only very rarely put into code was surprisingly time-consuming, and long sessions with an AI get worse and worse as it starts to forget the earlier symbols in its context; and less common but just as bad, it would simply make things up, and it was hard to get it not to fall into that same error several times.
I realized that to get to my usual quality of code, it actually took a bit more time to fix up the LLM than if I had done it myself.
Some of my colleagues and friends get much better speed improvements; but the code they are emitting is of poor quality. At least one person told me that it really doesn't matter if the code is readable or not, because the LLM will understand it. But the idea that an LLM has such near-infinite amounts of reasoning power that an impenetrable design is no barrier is almost certain false.
Jameswa@reddit
Have you used the latest models recently? It’s a completely different experience
HommeMusical@reddit
In the last month. But then, what I am doing is generally off the beaten track when it comes to programming.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
This. One of the key giveaways that AI is actually quite terrible is that it needs to be *forced* upon us. SWE are one the first people to typically adopt the newest technology to make them more effective, so if it really was that good it would not need to be mandatory.
Sounds about right. In most of our daily work AI is will give you a slight net negative in terms of productivity + the downsides of burning tokens and losing your skills. All studies show the same
HommeMusical@reddit
We will see if this continues. The jury is definitely still out. Either way, I'm expecting a harsh sentence.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
I expect to see some major shifts within 6 months. We will see.
Groetjes van de AI-Vrije Ingenieur :)
HommeMusical@reddit
Groeten uit Rouen van iemand zoals jij!
I miss Amsterdam, but we simply couldn't afford it. And the bread is better here.
TikiTDO@reddit
My point was more about the nature of technology as an input medium, not the public perception about the technology.
The issue with AI is it's a much more complex way to input data. However, that's really what AI is; a way to input data. Blaming AI for bad result would be like blaming the terminal for the bug in your code. If someone the AI to do a stupid thing without knowing what it was doing, that's on the user.
If you're cleaning up common issues and footguns, you're not treating AI development like a software project. Normally when you encounter a bug in your code, the natural instinct should be to fix it. If the AI is doing something you don't want it to do, you should probably investigate why, and add some extra references for the AI explaining what to do in order to avoid those things.
The point is that a long session with the AI today, and a long session with the exact same, identical AI model a month from now should be totally different things, because the guidance that your repo gives the AI should be constantly changing. I keep using the interpreter analogy. You can view AI as just another execution environment, only the code it's executing is just natural language descriptions of workflows you want it to do, and things you want it to consider while doing those workflows. The only thing that makes it different from any other code is the thing running it, and where it's used. These workflows are largely going to be dev flows, style guides, and ways to avoid those same common footguns you want it to avoid. Code quality improves a ton when you can describe to it what "code quality" means to you, and how you achieve it.
So essentially, if you're finding it's making things up... I hate to keep hammering this point, but you're not really using it right. You're asking it to do the things it can't do, and it's usually not smart enough to go "Sorry boss, no can do" unless you ask it to do so before starting. Again though, that's on the dev. If a new guy shows up on a construction site, and tries to pull out a screw with a nail puller, that's not the fault of the nail puller. At worst it's the fault of the guy that sold you the nail puller saying that it's at tricorder from star trek.
When you ask more from a tool than the tool can do... That is not the fault of the tool. It's the fault of the person using the tool.
One thing to realise is that LLMs don't have an "unlimited amount of reasoning power." No, they have a very, very strictly limited, and finite amount of reasoning power. The secret to using LLMs is to give it workflows that will let it use that finite pool of reasoning power effectively. That's a development problem; "do you have the code that when run through AI gives results that don't suck?"
The best way I've found to look at it is to think of it like a 4x strategy game. Each turn you can only do so many things, and go so far. If you split your resources too thinly you'll fail everywhere. If you try to mass your resources, you can miss obvious problems. When it's 3am and you have a meeting at 9am all you can really think is "One. More. Turn..."
HommeMusical@reddit
This is a good comment. I am so far not seeing the solid results from organizations using this strategy but I certainly believe they are possible. We shall see.
Well, yes, that was my point. If the code becomes unreadable to humans then it's likely to be less readable to AIs.
TikiTDO@reddit
A common starting point that you can build from is the "Explore, Plan, Implement, Validate" loop. That's starting to appear more in the mainstream.
So the idea here is that you have some documentation in your codebase explaining your codebase, where things are, and the way thing are structured, your code style/naming preferences, and other dev guidance. Then whenever you want to do something in a codebase you don't know you start by outlining the issue, and having the AI explore the codebase to find the things that are affected, and generate a report based on what it found.
Once you know more about what parts of the code are involved, and what those parts are meant to do, you can think about it, and decide direction you want the solution to take. From there, it's on you to explain that to the AI and have it generate an implementation plan explaining what it would do. Finally, you read over that plan, and if it's going to do what you expect then have implement the plan, and then you have it write and run some tests, as well as do any linting, type-checking, and other static analysis you might want to do.
Obviously you need documentation explaining to the AI what each of these steps entails in your specific codebase, what commands to run, and when to stop and ask for help.
That sounds like a lot of work for a small feature, and it certainly is. However, the idea is that eventually this process is well oiled enough that you don't actually have to go through every step by hand for every change. Instead you could just hand some simple/tedious tasks off to AI entirely, while you focus on going through the more detailed workflow on a bigger, much more challenging problem that would normally take you weeks or months.
Essentially, rather than "how can I get AI to do my job" the correct mindset is "how do what I like better with the help of AI."
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Dumbest out of touch post in this thread.
Specialist_Golf8133@reddit
yeah but what's the actual demand vs how many of those roles are getting filled. feels like a lot of companies are posting just to keep pipelines warm while they wait to see if their current team + AI can handle it. would bet money those 15% more postings aren't turning into 15% more hires
McCoyrsvp@reddit
Yes, AI may be killing some jobs but the more realistic reason is that many large companies did layoffs to be able to lower salaries. They layoff the high salary lower end jobs and re-hire those jobs at a lower rate.
Qalam_3a@reddit
This is a really useful dataset—thanks for pulling it. The 15% increase since mid‑2025 does seem to cut against the more alarmist “AI is replacing developers” headlines.
I think your point about cost reduction driving more demand is key. When building software becomes cheaper, more products get built, more features get shipped, and the need for people who understand architecture, infrastructure, and product complexity doesn’t disappear—it often grows.
From what I’ve seen in my own network (mostly startups and mid‑size companies), the demand for senior engineers hasn’t slowed down, but the nature of the work is shifting. There’s more focus on integration, AI‑augmented workflows, and leveraging LLMs effectively. Juniors seem to be facing a tougher market, though—possibly because the same productivity gains mean one experienced dev can now do what two used to do.
Curious if others are seeing the same: is hiring up but only for specific roles? And is the bar for entry‑level positions getting higher?
farfunkle@reddit
Snort snort
throwaway2481632@reddit
well, i've been unemployed for over a year. and all i get are polite rejections if I get any response at all. something that's never happened in 15+ years of my career. so there's that.
cake-day-on-feb-29@reddit
Could you be looking in the wrong place (physically)?
I know some younger kids who have struggled post-college, as the field they chose isn't super hot in their area, and they can't move due to family/other reasons. Stuck working basic jobs despite having specific degrees.
deer_hobbies@reddit
This is about indeed, not jobs. See "all" jobs posted on indeed: https://fred.stlouisfed.org/series/IHLIDXUS
sweetbeems@reddit
I really do think that there's just a massive reorganization going on from big tech -> smaller tech. The amount of new tech & startups coming on the scene is insane.
lacymcfly@reddit
Yeah, that tracks with what I'm seeing too. Bunch of my friends who got caught in the big tech culls have landed at companies nobody's ever heard of, working on stuff that's actually shipping. Smaller teams move faster and don't have the same overhead killing momentum.
The thing is, a lot of those smaller orgs couldn't have existed at this scale five years ago. The tooling has dropped the floor cost of building something real to basically nothing. So yeah, more places hiring, but way different from the FAANG lottery era.
OkWoodpecker5612@reddit
I hope the smaller startups make big tech companies quiver in their boots.
Sir_BarlesCharkley@reddit
A few might. The vast majority won't. Such is the life of a start up.
Steel_Shield@reddit
And those that do will be bought, of course
brilliant-trash22@reddit
Probably stupid question, but let’s say a tech startup is acquired by Apple. Do all the employees of the tech startup just become Apple employees, or do they split the few million they receive between each employee and just retire?
LeftyRodriguez@reddit
Depends. Some acquisitions are just to hire the talent (an 'acquihire'), in which case the original product is retired and the employees become Apple employees. Some are to acquire the product, either to keep it as a separate concern or integrate it into another extant product, in which case some/all employees will come over or some may be made redundant. Others might just be to acquire a technology or patent portfolio, in which case some/all/none might come over, among other acquisition models. Either way, the only people entitled to money from the acquisition would be those that had equity in the company, so, no they won't just split the money between each employee (unless the employee, again, had equity). Some generous companies might, however, pay out some amount to each employee from the funds, but there's no right to that proceeds without equity. There might be some edge cases where an employee's contract entitles them to some proceeds if they company is required without regard to any ownership they may have in the company.
AccordingGlass7324@reddit
The equity bit is the part most people only learn about once it’s too late. The other catch is the liquidation stack. Even if you have equity, investors usually get paid first, sometimes with a multiple, then preferred converts, then whatever’s left trickles to common. A “$50M exit” can mean $0 for rank-and-file common shareholders if the prefs are heavy.
If you’re joining an early startup and care about acquisition upside, ask what class of shares your options convert into, current pref stack, and any liquidation preferences or participating preferred. Also check if there’s a carve-out pool for employees on sale. I’ve seen small, “meh” exits where a clean stack plus a carve-out meant engineers walked away with life-changing money, and big headline exits where common got basically nothing.
EveryQuantityEver@reddit
The fact that this is the majority of exists really does explain why people don’t want to work for startups anymore
max123246@reddit
This is why I'll never work at a startup. Why would I ever work that hard for being paid under rate for a lottery ticket that's expired
brilliant-trash22@reddit
That’s interesting. So do companies who acquire frequently (like Apple) just look at all tech startups even if the tech doesn’t apply to them, just so they can see the employees and ask for their resumes? Specifically in regards to acquihires.
I feel like it would be cheaper if Apple/parent company hires a contract talent recruiter specifically to headhunt this employee they want, instead of spending $$ to acquire the company
SCP-iota@reddit
Remember when people were incentivized to compete rather than sell, because of the potential for large long-term gains? I don't, because the companies that buy figured out long before any of us were alive that they could offer shares instead of lump sums. Equity trading was a mistake.
IAmAThing420YOLOSwag@reddit
I think that's the entire point of tech startups for the last decade or something. Gambling on the disruptive nature of a system, hoping to either make a big fish nervous enough to buy it up, or ideally, effectively render costly regulations neutured like uber.
Honestly wonder about section 174 being a crutial ingredient to the startup, and even enterprise software ecosystems. What would things look like if it never existed?
YareSekiro@reddit
Yah feeling the same, the amount of new AI start ups is crazy and a lot of them are hiring
T-MoneyAllDey@reddit
I was kind of hoping this would be the case with AI and whatnot. Smaller teams are able to accomplish a lot more. I think with ai, your job security in Big Fortune 500 companies is declining but your ability to succeed by yourself will increase. Who needs a large consulting firm when you have a single person who can meet your needs.
Pitiful-Impression70@reddit
the part nobody is talking about is the tech debt tsunami thats about to hit. every startup that vibed their way to an mvp in 2025 is now realizing they need actual engineers to untangle the mess before it catches fire in production. ive seen codebases where the AI generated 80% of it and nobody on the team can explain how half the modules work
so yeah postings are up but the job is different now. its less "write code" and more "figure out what this AI wrote, why its breaking, and how to make it not fall over at scale." which honestly requires MORE skill not less. debugging code you didnt write is harder than writing it yourself
Pardon_my_salad@reddit
They are hiring again people but there have been so many lay offs that it is almost nothing. This has to become a lesson for most employees, what full eventual automation might look like. They do not care even if they fire the whole work force just for momentary profit. It also, feels that this was kind of a coordinated move from many companies to lower wages once more. Fire people and rehire for lower wage in the excuse of the so called restructuring. Disguised unethical practices.
FatefulDonkey@reddit
Maybe tech debt is accumulating.
The question is will AI grow fast enough in standards to be able solely to deal with the accumulated debt.
sailing67@reddit
tbh this matches what ive been seeing too. a bunch of my friends who were laid off in 2024 are all getting interviews again. i think the "AI kills jobs" narrative was always a bit overblown — if anything it just raised the floor for what gets built, which means more software, not less. still cautious but this is genuinely encouraging
BrightCandle@reddit
Going to be a lot of jobs appearing to rewrite the slop into something that works.
Sylvia_HH@reddit
This feels directionally encouraging, even if the lived experience still sucks for a lot of people. More demand can be real, while the hiring market is still messy and frustrating.
Ok_Cancel_7891@reddit
It is just Indeed
JonathanTheZero@reddit
I've had more recruiter message me on LinkedIn in Q1 26 than in all of 25. There's definitely an increase in demand for certain roles
Marble_Wraith@reddit
Doesn't mean software hiring is up 15%
GudPuddin@reddit
How does one start into this career? Looking to completely walk away from being a life long mechanic and don’t mind the entry level start and climb
pkmn_is_fun@reddit
do not do this. Youre genuinely better off as a mechanic
GudPuddin@reddit
I’ve done it just about my whole life and I am so tired of it. My body is failing from jumping around on concrete for 25+ years. I gotta do something else
omarous@reddit
Trust me software dev. will be worse for your back.
gummo_for_prez@reddit
Something else is fine, programming is just not the right thing. It's been broken for years with not a lot of hope of getting better on the horizon.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Now is the absolute worst time to switch since you have been born.
Maybe you could go to university and get at least a bsc, and then hopefully when you are done the market has unfked itself. I expect significant improvements within 2 years, personally. Call it copium if you wish
gummo_for_prez@reddit
Right now? You don't unless you're rich and don't care about money. I have 13 years of experience and no resume gaps until 2024. It took me 11 months to find a job after a layoff. This article is slightly optimistic, but I would do a lot of research before you jump in this pool. There are highly motivated CS grads from good schools that are unable to get jobs for years. The time to transition to this was 10 years ago. Right now, you'd be betting the farm with the most likely outcome being no work for years regardless of skills level due to no proven experience.
4407891fcd484b817f5e@reddit
I don’t mean to dissuade you but the door has practically been sealed shut for newcomers. MIT CS grads are having trouble finding jobs right now, let alone those mid-career in something else trying to make a switch. You might wanna look at different career paths
HommeMusical@reddit
The main thing is that you really have to enjoy programming, because otherwise it's a miserable job. (I still enjoy programming over fifty years after my first program, fifty years!, how the fsck did that happen?!)
The second thing is that this will take years unless you're super lucky.
I would start by mastering one programming language really well. For the last ten years, the answer to "Which language?" has been Python, because it's very widely used, it's very general purpose, and it's elegant and tends to teach good habits.
chamomile-crumbs@reddit
Probably cause recruiters are using LLMs to spam the same postings a zillion times. And then applicants are doing the same thing on the other side.
Are job boards worth literally anything at this point? We posted a developer job and it got like 500 applicants in the first 24 hours. How in the world is somebody supposed to make sense of that lol
davidbasil@reddit
It was an issue way back before AI. I remember one youtuber in 2016 saying that companies get 400-500 applicants for a front end engineer role in LA. Yet people used to get hired and juniors had a chance. So the volume is not a problem here.
SaxAppeal@reddit
LLMs have been capable enough to spam job postings for like 2 years at least.
whyyoudidit@reddit
ai agents have only become very good in the past 4 months and personal ai agents only since January (openclaw).
DFX1212@reddit
You don't need an agent to do this.
whyyoudidit@reddit
Only agents can use your own credentials to log into job portals and post job openings or apply on one. You can't do that with chatgpt or gemini.
BoomGoomba@reddit
You just need an API or a code controlling the browser, no need for agents
whyyoudidit@reddit
I get what you mean but deterministic scripts are not user friendly. Recruiters don't know how to create them and they often break. An agent doing the same task is as simple as a one line prompt.
chamomile-crumbs@reddit
Not sure why you’re being downvoted. There are tons of new tools for LLMs to run amok on the internet. My dad would never install the playwright MCP in 100 million years, but he loves computer use and the Claude workspace stuff
whyyoudidit@reddit
Because if you believe what I say then the hiring uptick may not be because of actually more jobs and devs are grasping at every single positivity they can get. I get it.
putin_my_ass@reddit
It seems like companies are going back to listing on their "careers" page and waiting for applicants to find them. Everyone knows the various job platforms are bullshit these days, most of the listings appear to be promoted and you have to go many pages deep to find the job postings you're interested in and they'll just repost the same job for months and months. Are they even actually hiring? You have no fucking idea!
So applicants are going back to searching for local companies and checking their careers page (like it used to be 10+ years ago).
Spunelli@reddit
Which is what exactly? The old way was headhunters -> direct hire or contract to hire. The kind of old way is posting a job online and reviewing resumes. All of those are the new way but with AI.
putin_my_ass@reddit
The resumes we receive from the careers page on our homepage have a better signal to noise ratio.
More real people, fewer bots and less spam.
Can't stop people from using AI to write their resume can you?
Spunelli@reddit
Correct, I cannot stop people from using AI to write their resume. I should have included it.
I have a spreadsheet of 300 careers page applications that I've applied too. Many who's tech stack matches mine exactly and coms have been SILENT. I don't understand nor know what to do. I'm basically doing the same thing i've done 'the old way', right now. It's never taken me longer than 3 months to find something.
Motor_Fudge8728@reddit
That would mean using the “job board openings” metric would underestimate the openings, but I think it acts as an acceptable proxy for the trend.
DynamicHunter@reddit
This is why they send you a take home test, or leetcode timed assessment, or just use AI scanning of the resume to weed people out unfairly because they can’t look at even half of them
crecentfresh@reddit
Maybe they should read my handwritten fucking cover letter. Oh they're not gonna okay
nekronics@reddit
Why wouldn't that have been the case for 2025 as well?
endless_looper@reddit
Welcome to year 3 of being replaced by AI in 6 months.
Bakoro@reddit
The only people who actually believed that are people who get all their news from bloggers who got paid for hyping up anything that got clicks, ans people dumb enough to take a CEO at their word.
EffectiveEquivalent@reddit
Someone finally gets it.
My little shop of 2 that used to lean on PowerApps simply because I don’t have that much time to code is now shipping beautiful work apps in a fraction of the time that even a powerapp would take to create.
Prior to AI, if my company wanted to build what I have been, it would have been at least 2 full time developers, simply not happening due to cost. We’re considering employing one just because the value for output has considerably increased.
Brave-Finding-3866@reddit
fake news ?
ThatInternetGuy@reddit
AI create the software but humans maintain them. So don't be too quick to fire off devs, just because a single dev may be able to use AI to create bigger codebase doesn't mean he alone could remember the whole AI generated code after a few months and to maintain it.
Alex_Hovhannisyan@reddit
And? Lots of devs are still not getting any responses from cold apps. It's a brutal market rn.
Not to mention so many of those are ghost job listings, or HR made them do it even though they have an internal candidate, or because it makes the company look productive/good to external stakeholders.
frankieche@reddit
Ghost jobs.
ILikeCutePuppies@reddit
I have a lot of senior friends from layoffs. About 30% are creating their own companies.
Some are at the point they are talking to VCs, some are just starting. Some have a few tens of million in funding.
If just a fraction of the software engineers and others who were laid off get to the people hiring stage it could be a boon for developers. Although there are a lot of head wins with geopolitics etc... at the moment. Hopefully VC funding does not shrink.
Clearandblue@reddit
In the past few weeks I've noticed a ramping of recruiters emailing me or messaging on LinkedIn. Though I think all but one of the roles lacked a salary range. I'm not looking so I didn't probe more. Hopefully now the market is picking up, the quality of jobs will follow.
It's a joke going around messaging people to ask if they want to work for your client if the client doesn't even have a salary range. Come back when you've finished the thought.
Loan-Pickle@reddit
After a year of no contact by recruiters on LinkedIn I’ve had 5 contact me in the past week. I’ve not even looking for a job and haven’t updated my LinkedIn in a couple of years, so I am surprised their searches are finding me.
Rowboatbillygoat@reddit
I was asked to do an AI interview this week. My gut says theres no job and Id just be a data point for training.
Hit by lay offs today. Things are fucked
dialate@reddit
It's been over a month of unemployment for me. Last time I hit the general market to get a job outside of network connections, 15 years ago, I submitted 3 resumes and got 2 offers, and accepted an offer one week after I started searching. Now I'm doing that many resumes per day, and nothing but radio silence, not even a rejection letter.
I had been passively searching since 2023 since the company I was at replaced the CEO with an incompetent chucklefuck, and has been steadily replacing management with low-IQ disengaged yes-men. Again, no responses, nothing but crickets. The last time I've gotten an interview for anything was in 2022.
Kinda reminds me of 2007/early 2008. Most folks were blissfully unaware of the slow-motion economy trainwreck, but R&D was getting gutted. I lost my sweet gig because the startup I was at all of a sudden found themselves with no customers. Then steadily got and lost contracts afterward because everything was drying up.
sculley4@reddit
Job. Postings. Don't. Matter. At. All.
lood9phee2Ri@reddit
They. Generally. Do. If. You. Are. Looking. For. A. Job. Or. Just. A. Change.
VeeFu@reddit
For every one legitimate role, there are 10 posts from recruiters. They duplicate, reword, and repost in the name of "anonymizing" the client, with different pay bands, job titles, and search terms.
Worsebetter@reddit
We need laws about anonymous job posting and ghost jobs. If I’m applying to a career position i need some reassurances that it’s not a scam.
Spunelli@reddit
lol. there are laws to create the ghost jobs. Because you all wanted fairness for hiring within the company. You all wanted the company to give a fair chance to regular people outside the company and so we created laws to make the company post a job externally before doing what they were already going to do.... hire internally. GG, i guess.
Worsebetter@reddit
You’re right. Never mind. I agree. Do nothing.
trulyhighlyregarded@reddit
Yeah, the ghost job thing is obscuring the true situation. It's out of control on every platform. On Indeed, if you use a browser extension like JobScrub, you can see that like a third of the listings are duds. Market's fucked...
MarkIsARedditAddict@reddit
It should be fraud to obtain job seekers' personal information without an actual job being available matching the posting. Personally I'd make it a felony because if someone gets caught doing it you know they snagged thousands to hundreds of thousands of applicants' data not to mention stealing all their time
There should also be laws on how companies need to delete job seekers' data within ~3-6 months of application unless the applicant continually consents for them to keep it every 3-6 months. I routinely get emails about jobs using info I used to apply 15+ years ago meaning sites and employers are never purging old data. Why yes of course I want a data entry job for $12/hr now that I'm a senior software engineer
I guess I should just move the the EU because GDPR is closer to ideal than the US will ever even discuss
SaxAppeal@reddit
This is a straw man argument. That was already the case before Jan 2026. A percentage increase in job postings would still represent an increase in real job openings.
VeeFu@reddit
Sounds like you're saying the "role duplication" rate has not changed since January, or hasn't changed enough to disprove "real" role growth.
Well, I truly hope you're right. It's hard to be optimistic about this market. Getting sick of recruiters doing the "gaslight and ghost" thing.
SaxAppeal@reddit
I just think LLMs have been capable enough to duplicate job postings for at least two years, if not longer
spareminuteforworms@reddit
No there is a desperation increase among consulting companies willing to partake in (more) fraud.
SaxAppeal@reddit
Also, while I think there’s evidence that the big tech market is drying up, roles at smaller orgs will be opening up because they now need someone to produce code that actually understands code, and if they can hire someone with Claude to implement a saas solution in-house for significantly cheaper, that’s actually creating new job opportunities. They just look different than what we’re used to.
TyrusX@reddit
Yep
nimshwe@reddit
Ok but still if the stats go up they go up, even if the real number is lower
HommeMusical@reddit
This assumes the fraud percentage is a constant. I think that's an unwarranted assumption.
VeeFu@reddit
I'd wager the real to fake job posting ratio has gone down since AI tools that make slop so much easier.
nimshwe@reddit
Do they though, here people are referring to multiple postings for the same job. Ctrl c Ctrl v is not made easier by claude
kRkthOr@reddit
Rewording things is one of the best use cases for LLMs, so where before it would've taken someone an hour to make 5 copies, now it takes 5 minutes to make 100.
But I agree with you nonetheless. Odds are, up is up.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
It is because the tech world is slowly catching up to the fact that AI does not increase productivity, and in fact that forcing it to be used for everything actually makes you lose it.
Having said that, its heartbreaking to see what grifters did to my profession. I don’t recognize it anymore, and it all happened in a year’s time
deja-roo@reddit
AI definitely can increase productivity, and it's insane to see someone legitimately say otherwise in 2026
It doesn't very effectively replace people though. At least not entirely.
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Only in certain cases. Forcing it in all cases will actually make you slower. Studies have shown this
GregBahm@reddit
Literally the first line of your linked paper:
Something about this topic makes people so eager to be intellectually disingenuous. I think it's born out of a desire to combat AI hype men, yet in a way it hypes the AI harder than 10,000 shitty techbro sales pitches.
What's the opposite of "damning with faint praise?" "Glazing with crap critiques?"
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Please read the results section:
Motivated by the salient setting of AI and software skills, we design a coding task and evaluation around a relatively new asynchronous Python library and conduct randomized experiments to understand the impact of AI assistance on task completion time and skill development. We find that using AI assistance to complete tasks that involve this new library resulted in a reduction in the evaluation score by 17% or two grade points (Cohen’s d=0.738, p=0.010). Meanwhile, we did not find a statistically significant acceleration in completion time with AI assistance (Figure 6).
So say NO to Slop, lest you want your skills to degrade to the level of an LLM (ie very low)
GregBahm@reddit
The finding of the paper was that, if you use AI to do a skill, you don't learn how to do that skill without AI. It's all well and good to quantify that intuitive observation scientifically, in a "science proves water is wet" kind of way.
I drive an automatic transmission car. This caused me to not learn the skill of driving a manual. A couple times in my life, I've been asked to drive stick, and in those situations, I've been totally screwed.
AI is the same way. The more a programmer uses AI, the more a programmer is reliant on AI. So probably in the future, if a programmer has their AI taken away, that programmer will be totally screwed.
But also probably, just like with automatic transmission cars, we'll just eat the risk. It's important to be thoughtful and deliberate about burning these bridges behind us. But here in 2026, that's a bridge that probably all engineering teams are going to choose to burn sooner or later.
BoomGoomba@reddit
Time spent prompting can be bigger than time spent coding. While prompting you loose the coding skills which means harder time correcting and understanding the code and more prompt gambling
Rollingprobablecause@reddit
I think it's just the form of code camps, skill camps, etc where people pitch more six figure incomes without a degree and sucker everyone into that understanding. The deemphasis and demonization of compsci/eng/CIS/etc is proving to be the worst outcome here. Those college courses were critical for success and now we have a new technology that's way more complex on top of all the other coding related structures, meaning self-education is a bigger barrier than ever. You have youtube influencers claiming that it's easier than before and I know for a fact if I dropped them in my mess of a GraphQL environment they'd have serious trouble during the first 90 days.
stumblinbear@reddit
Whether it increases productivity depends on how you use it. A newbie who doesn't know how to use a tool properly will use it wrong, and someone else will have to redo their work. Someone who knows how to use the tool can use it effectively
Same goes for every profession in existence
therealslimshady1234@reddit
True, but AI is being abused. It is used for everything, while it shouldnt be used for even half that.
DynamicHunter@reddit
Postings =/= hirings, we should all know this by now. Huge amount of ghost jobs and fake scam jobs and resume collector garbage disposal funnels
spareminuteforworms@reddit
I quit linkedin because for about 10 years it led to zero positive interactions.
nooffense789@reddit
this should be pinned
trulyhighlyregarded@reddit
Yeah, the ghost job thing is obscuring the true situation. It's out of control on every platform. On Indeed, if you use a browser extension like JobScrub, you can see that like a third of the listings are duds. Market's fucked...
pekter@reddit
Tech debt times are coming devs debugging is going to be a key asset. Always has been but now even more valuable since the bootstrap mediocre project bar is so low and cheap...
Infinite_Wolf4774@reddit
People can barely use Google. Anyone who thinks the vast majority of businesses owners will be able to vibecode software is crazy. I think with software being somewhat easier to produce, we will see more businesses with internal software teams. We might see less people at big tech and more devs working at SMEs.
madbadanddangerous@reddit
Idk I don't buy this.
In 2025 I applied to over 100 jobs and managed to get around 20 interview loops. Made it to the final interview 6 times and was ultimately second place in all of them -- no offers.
I'm 2026 so far I've had zero interviews. Literally zero times. Not even a recruiter call. By this time last year, for comparison, I had completed 3 of those 6 full interview loops and had several more started.
2026 is empty space. There is no job market anymore, at least in tech. No one is hiring. For the record, I have a STEM PhD and 5+ YOE, with management experience too, and my focus area is AI/ML. I've been on the scene in this field for 15 years total, across 4 startups, national labs, I have published research, and now I'm doing consulting until I can get back in the game. But there is no game. Tech is dead
iris700@reddit
n=1
EveryQuantityEver@reddit
My experience is different than yours, and would support their claim. I’ve had probably a dozen or so interviews loops, getting to the final round about 5 times, and being offered the job 3 times so far.
ChadtheWad@reddit
I don't know, it's hard to gauge from an individual perspective even when you have lots of applications. In 2023 I applied to around 100 jobs or so, got 15 follow ups and 1 offer. 2024, I applied to maybe 5-10, and got an offer out of that. In 2025 I had a few referrals to opportunities, with two that materialized into offers. So far in 2026 I've had two companies tell me that they "waiting for funding to open up." It's just been all over the place.
RiftHunter4@reddit
Some folks haven't realized that job postings and actual jobs are NOT the same thing anymore. There's a lot of fake postings these days
nooffense789@reddit
fake jobs. I haven’t got an interview and I have 6 years of experience.
GoreSeeker@reddit
Not that this isn't true, but always remember that the famous FRED data site is specifically based off Indeed postings, so that impacts its statistics a bit to bias towards the performance trends of Indeed itself.
eufemiapiccio77@reddit
The UK market is massively picking up this year
spergilkal@reddit
I do get the feeling some companies put job postings for a bunch of random stuff just to keep up the image of growth.
podgladacz00@reddit
Loot at how much are for juniors now... Tip is it is under 5%
spergilkal@reddit
Hasn't this been the case for a long time, first everyone wanted a programmer, then they wanted a programmer with minimum 3 years experience, then 5 and finally something called a full stack developer with 10 years hands on experience with everything.
legendsalper@reddit
Posting does not mean actual jobs.
Messy-Recipe@reddit
Well, that makes sense. If you have a factory with machines producing widgets, and somebody designs a dongle you can affix to your existing machines to produce widgets faster, you're not going to scrap a bunch of your machines so as to keep productivity at the same levels as before.
In fact you'll probably buy more machines, because now you get more production out of each one, so they represent a better return on your marginal costs than they did before, compared to other potential expenses.
It's not quite the same ofc, since working on software isn't producing individual items to meet demand, but the concept is similar since there's usually unending amounts of work that you never have enough manpower to actually handle.
lambrettist@reddit
Didn’t Sam Altman say he thinks we will need 0x the developers to bring all this new ai enhanced stuff to market? I believe it.
idk108@reddit
Wages are the only thing going down with this AI push. Companies still need people to account for what AI does and contracts to fulfill with AI companies for the number of lines AI write. Developers won't be replaced by AI, they will be replaced by other devs on lower wages to offset the cost of the AI itself
tlmbot@reddit
It’s not against the narrative or for it
Yes making more efficient use of a resource often creates more demand for it (As you’ll be taught in econ classes)
All I can say right now is that it looks like the system response (for dev jobs) looks underdamped
It received something like a shock in long run terms, and responded like an underdamped system
ow_meer@reddit
Before 2022, I was contacted by recruiters in LinkedIn a couple times per week. In 2022 it was between 5 to 10 everyday. It was insane, everyday I had to open LinkedIn to clear out all the messages from desperate recruiters.
Then when the hiring bubble burst in 2023 it dropped to about one per month and it was always some extremely shitty job posting. It stayed like that until about the second half of last year.
Now I'm getting contacted about once every other week and the job posting quality has improved. Still not as good before 2022, but things are improving.
SnooPets752@reddit
AI is great at getting the initial version running. If you want to get it production ready, stamp out all the bugs and edge cases, look over the security, scale it, etc, you need a human. At least right now
therealslimshady1234@reddit
Why are you being downvoted? This is exactly right
Ok_Addition_356@reddit
Why do people still think indeed is like some gold standard of job availability metric?
Wasn't it all kind of meaningless even before this past year?
metaphorm@reddit
I think this is a clear example of Jevons Paradox which explains how when the cost of production factors decreases, demand rises to meet the lower cost of production. In other words, if demand was previously constrained on cost (resource availability) then when cost goes down the new demand frontier is for more of that product.
Coding Agents increase developer productivity, so the cost to produce software goes down. This increases demand for software so the number of developers needed goes up. I think this will be the new normal for several years at least. There are irreducible and non-automatable steps in software development that will require human-in-the-loop for the foreseeable future. We're not bottlenecked on time to write to the code anymore. We're bottlenecked on things like product planning, requirements gathering, stakeholder buy-in, QA and testing, and performance/reliability. All of those things require human intervention. So hiring is up.
sean_hash@reddit
15% from a trough still puts you below 2022 levels. The recovery story depends a lot on where you set the baseline.
deja-roo@reddit
Yeah but 2021-2022 was insane.
upsidedownshaggy@reddit
The 2020-2022 hiring numbers was never realistic, nor were they going to be sustainable. Companies were hiring literally anyone with a pulse to be a software engineer and the market is objectively worse for it.
macgoober@reddit
2022 was not healthy either, just in the other extreme
seanamos-1@reddit
2020-2022 was the COVID boom cycle, its not reasonable to expect hiring to return to those levels for quite some time, possibly until there is another boom.
You definitely could have capitalized on that time window, but its also import to remember, most of those boom cycles do not represent a new normal, and there will be a painful correction afterwards.
Spez_is-a-nazi@reddit
The entire history of the profession was below 2022 levels.
AndyTheSane@reddit
2022 was pretty bonkers, though.
ChadtheWad@reddit
I've been watching this FRED data for a while too, but I'm not sure how much it can be trusted. I was using Indeed/Glassdoor around 6 years ago for job applications, but it feels like a lot of the jobs have shifted to LinkedIn or independently searching each company's Greenhouse/Ashby for jobs.
dis3as3d_sfw@reddit
Fire and rehire at a lower salary
nschubach@reddit
I got a job at the beginning of this year that is basically just an AI manager. I am supposed to use Claude to "speed up development" and approve the code that I push to git. AI is still very much a tool that is expected to be used and it's being used as a tool to reduce the time/cost to ship.
Guinness@reddit
If you’re not completely fucking stupid and take the time to look around you, you’ll quickly realize that people are having a lot of fun with these tools. As much as I hate it, just look at Reddit and how many apps people are making with LLMs.
You would think that CEOs might figure out that if people are having so much fun causing a flood of “bible apps” (if you remember the iPhone App Store launch). That maybe, just MAYBE, there is something there.
In the right hands of people who know what the fuck they are doing, these tools can create some pretty awesome things. But in the wrong hands, they’re a fucking disaster. And that honestly brings up another reason as to why there will be increased demand.
There is so much shit code out there, both before LLMs and after, that programmers have plenty of work cut out for them. Just look at Amazon. How many outages have they had this year because their shitty LLM generated code didn’t have enough eyeballs before getting released to production.
Or how about Windows 11? It’s a bloated piece of shit because they don’t have enough humans in the loop. And that’s my whole point. These tools are powerful. But they need a human in the loop.
HommeMusical@reddit
Thanks for saving me the time it would take to read your post!
Smallpaul@reddit
The other reason AI is driving demand is that somebody needs to build and integrate the AI features and products. Those chatbots embedded in every app don’t just appear magically and they are far harder to build in a reliable way than it seems at first glance.
honorspren000@reddit
My experience has been the complete opposite.
From what I’ve seen, less people are hiring devs. Layoffs are happening everywhere in tech because of AI. Government IT (in the US) took a huge hit with the downsizing of the government. And smaller businesses are realizing that they don’t need to hire a dev to create or edit their website now they have AI.
But that’s just me.
gravenbirdman@reddit
I think companies are hiring more, but firing even more.
Just came from a tech conference with investors from early stage through public market analysts. Consensus is if you're not firing a human for every human you hire, your company's failing to adapt to AI.
oureux@reddit
But I thought ai solved software development…
whyyoudidit@reddit
my tax role has become part tax domain expertise and part agentic systems architect. It's weird because my uncle has been a systems architect for years and doesn't believe in agentic ai and isn't using any coding agents. In other words, I am more involved in agentic architecture then him and I am not a traditional systems architect. I'm not even a programmer. But thinking from the global tax departments perspective and looking how to implement ai agents is what got me here.
Expensive-Average814@reddit
I think AI is lowering the barrier to start building things, which actually increases the total amount of software being created.But that doesn’t eliminate dev work it shifts it. There’s still a big gap between “AI-generated code” and something that’s production-ready, scalable, and maintainable.Feels less like fewer jobs and more like the role is evolving — less time writing boilerplate, more time reviewing, designing, and fixing edge cases AI can’t handle well.
hello2u3@reddit
Coding work will compress, systems work will expand
drteq@reddit
Product designers need developers, who else will they blame for their poor communication skills?
EqualElectronic7662@reddit
That trend actually makes a lot of sense. AI isn’t really replacing developers—it’s changing what we spend time on. The repetitive stuff is getting faster, so naturally more products and features are being built. That increases demand for people who can design systems, make decisions, and connect everything properly.
From what I’ve seen, teams are not necessarily shrinking—they’re becoming more focused. The expectation now is that a developer should be able to do more than just write code. Things like system design, understanding business logic, working with AI tools, and maintaining scalable systems are becoming more important.
Also, with lower development costs, more startups and companies are experimenting with new ideas. That alone creates more work—more apps, more integrations, more maintenance.
So yeah, it doesn’t feel like “AI is killing jobs.” It feels more like:
👉 fewer low-skill tasks
👉 more demand for skilled developers
And about the hiring bar—it’s definitely shifting. Not just “can you code,” but “can you think, adapt, and build something useful end-to-end.”
Yodaddysbelt@reddit
Be gone bot
Brilliant-8148@reddit
Ai slop post. Go delete yourself
MagicalVagina@reddit
If AI is not killing jobs, it's for sure killing reddit comments.
worldarkplace@reddit
If I could generate value like this, I would just go entrepreneur 100%. If you are like this why are you working for anyone else...
Klaroxy@reddit
Ah what the AI is not taking away your job yay what a surprise, google 2.0 will not overthrow a civilization, I’m geniuenly surprised