Here's what I don't get about the "AI can build all software" scenario. It extrapolates AI capabilities up to a certain, very advanced point, and then, inexplicably, it stops.
If AI is capable enough to "build pretty much anything", why is it not capable enough to also use what it builds (instead of people using it) or, for that matter, to decide what to build?
If AI can, say, build air traffic control software as well as humans, why can't it also be the controller as well as humans? If it can build medical diagnosis software and healtchare management software, why can't it offer the diagnosis and prescribe treatment? Is the argument that there's something special about writing software that AI can do as well as people, but not other things? Why is that?
I don't know how soon AI will be able to "build pretty much anything", but when it does, Yegge's point that "all software sectors are threatened" seems to be unimaginative. Why not all sectors full stop?
If AI is capable enough to "build pretty much anything", why is it not capable enough to also use what it builds (instead of people using it) or, for that matter, to decide what to build?
If AI can, say, build air traffic control software as well as humans, why can't it also be the controller as well as humans? If it can build medical diagnosis software and healtchare management software, why can't it offer the diagnosis and prescribe treatment? Is the argument that there's something special about writing software that AI can do as well as people, but not other things? Why is that?
I don't know how soon AI will be able to "build pretty much anything", but when it does, Yegge's point that "all software sectors are threatened" seems to be unimaginative. Why not all sectors full stop?