Sounds like exponential growth of crappy software. I'm not saying that before we didn't have mass produced crap in SE, but now it will turn into explosive overflow.

> We are going to get near instant software from prompt, multiple ones and then choose the best one.

If you extract the spec from first implementation and reimplement from scratch you get a free testing oracle. Where they diverge you send the agent to decide which one had a bug.

Anyone remember the old days when a new frontend framework came out every 3 months. That has pretty much stopped. No one cares anymore.

The exponential is leading to full compute-in-memory within a few years which will be 100 times more efficient. Which means at least 10 times larger models that are much smarter in addition to extremely fast.

It's going to skip the code entirely for small businesses and just render UIs straight from context data and prompts at interactive speeds. Kind of like Google's Genie does with games but much more accurately.

I'm not sure. Engineers could still develop software the old way, you know taking months to deliver something like, let's say, Obsidian? Or Ghostty? Taking care of every single line of code, of dependencies, of good architecture. Truly the old way. And if the product is good it will succeed.

> Discussions about choosing a library with the best syntactic sugar method naming is just as crazy as suggesting we type in assembly.

I have a more hopeful take. As AIs improve and get faster we can more quickly and iteratively improve code which we may have historically avoided due to the work involved.

I know i've made several refactors that would have otherwise been insane lifts. Not only because the work involved but because sometimes you don't know if it will work, and so you have a sort of double friction; you don't know if it will even succeed. With an AI you can just throw it at the refactor to see if it runs into a problem all while you're having a coffee break or w/e.

In general AI is going to enable humanity to be more extreme versions of itself. For good and bad. I suspect more bad than good, though.

Our bottleneck is going to be verification.

And they will all suck! I can't wait.

And how are you going to determine which is the best? Going through all the possible combinations of users and usage? So mostly it shifts the work from generation to validation.

The models might be so fast that they can autocomplete your prompt before you even finish it, and generate dozens of possible applications before you're even done asking.

You won't. Because 80% of the complexity is just "knowing what to build". You will get something that gives you a prototype in 1 min, then you break it, then you get a slightly better prototype one one side, but newly broken in another way, and you're going to repeat over and over.