> “The unfortunate thing right now, specifically for recent college grads, is those positions that are most likely to be automated are the entry-level positions that they would be seeking,” said Matthew Martin, U.S. senior economist at Oxford Economics, a forecasting firm.
This matches my experience. About 90% of the coding tasks I would have assigned to a junior in years past, I can get done for a fraction of the price at a similar quality and in 1/3rd the time by a tool like Claude Code. The only reason I have to hire a junior would be to develop them into a senior over 3-5 years, and companies are far too shortsided to think about that training pipeline.
A good senior engineer still does things the tools can't- in particular, non-programming tasks like planning, persuading, and accountability. I fear that there will be a crisis in these skills as the current seniors retire/change industries in the coming years.
Its pretty clear there will be a crisis in these skills from just a structural point of view. Career development is a sequential pipeline that sieves people.
If you've as an industry blocked the pipeline saying we don't need these people, time passes and those people who had to invest to get to that point abandon the bad investments, and you get no new people coming in. People leave such industry because of burnout, and aging/retirement/death. The dynamics created are one of a deflationary sieve where the front-loaded cost savings becomes a back-ended cost sink. Tthe demand and related cost of the professionals is recognized at a point where there is great need but they can't be found at any cost. In system's engineering we call this Hysteresis whipsaws, Mises might call this the first early stages of the Economic Calculation Problem.
> The only reason I have to hire a junior would be to develop them into a senior over 3-5 years, and companies are far too shortsided to think about that training pipeline.
Well and, without special arrangements, once trained for 3-5 years they'd now be more valuable and as easily scooped up by another company - if companies are short-sighted about the training pipeline, so too are employees short-sighted about how long they intend to remain somewhere
So sounds like the new entry level position is going to be learning to manage automations.
Question I still don't have an answer to is what that career trajectory looks like. I was at a event last week where someone from a popular startup, Clay, described a position (a "GTM engineer") as very intentionally not strategic, but about boots on the ground execution. I came away from the event wondering was "ok, how long until you automate away this line of work?"
> “It is difficult to find the motivation to keep applying,” said Mr. Taylor, adding that he was now building personal software projects to show prospective employers.
I know it's common advice for students and newly grads to do this, but in my experience, employers do not care about personal software projects or open-source contributions unless the work is aligned with their product. That, or you built something that is easily lucrative. Otherwise, they do not care, they do not care, they do not care.
If your goal is personal enrichment, by all means, but don't kill yourself on a personal project with the intention of impressing an employer.
As a new grad in this job market who got 2 offers (1 FAANG), I heavily disagree. My projects (specifically my toy operating system) got me my offers.
Projects are just about the only thing you can add to your resume to show competence. Everyone has a degree, and no one has work experience.
Not only did my projects show that I have completed semi-relevant work in something considered relatively complex, which presumably got me past resume screenings (confirmed by my hiring manager), my projects also gave a prime talking point in interviews that let me showcase my domain knowledge and way that I work. (Consider cliche interview questions like “what is the biggest challenge you’ve faced”, and how they relate to your projects)
This is especially beneficial if you’re being interviewed by other engineers, and you can geek out over a project. Being human and enjoyable, while demonstrating technical competence, is a great interview winner.
Ofc I have limited experience, but small samples can add up if other evidence corroborates with it.
Really? I find it pretty nice to be able to look at the code a candidate writes, even if it's in a completely different context to the job they're applying for. It'll speak far better to their abilities than even most technical interviews.
AI performs best in non-deterministic environments where highly extensive if slightly imperfect (or even hallucinatory) knowledge works just fine. When mapped onto today’s jobs, the fit feels less natural for high-level engineering than for “looser” tasks that would do well to be armed with wider knowledge. In other words, it seems like AI—or AI-armed humans—are more squarely aimed at executives.
Delegating executive decision making to what is essentially an automated form of Reddit and stack overflow seems like it could possibly lead to bad results.
Something has to come to a head soon. High paying jobs can't disappear if everything is going to continue to cost an arm and two legs. We're either going to have to pick up pitchforks or we're going to complacent ourselves into multi-generational family living. I hope the former. I'm sick of the money funnel pointing in the wrong direction.
I don't know, start with a lower salary. I did. Ok, that was like nearly 20 years ago, but it was in Manhattan. It wasn't cheap. Stop trying to work at stupid FAANG companies. I can't understand why anyone would want to work at those places. You learn nothing because there's too many people. On the other side of the fence, the pressure cooker startups adopting those insane 12 hour 6 work day weeks are also bad.
So I get it, there's not much left...but expecting six figures for your first job is crazy.
The part of the article that talks about tech leaders encouraging young people to "code" and pursue CS degrees, combined with fabled "six-figure" salaries is reminiscent to me of the Dot-com Bubble. All sorts of people were being encouraged to study "computers" (even my dear, technically inept wife). When the bubble burst, there were just no jobs for young people who were in it solely for the money, not the passion. I have to wonder if the job market is again oversaturated with these people.
Even within the article's anecdotes:
> Ms. Mishra, the Purdue graduate, did not get the burrito-making gig at Chipotle. But her side hustle as a beauty influencer on TikTok, she said, helped her realize that she was more enthusiastic about tech marketing and sales than software engineering. [emphasis mine]
Sounds like she was headed down the wrong path to begin with. How many others are like this who have just been riding a hype wave?
Nevertheless, I will say that learning to code is still a useful skill for anyone, even in a future saturated with AI.
It shocked me to learn my midsized Southern city (<0.5M MSA) has 1762 H1B jobs, ostensibly because there aren't any qualified Americans; the most common complaint I hear from my peers is that "there aren't enough tech jobs here" when the reality is over 1% of our workforce is underpaid H1Bs, primarily tech field.
I don't think its hateful to want your healthy society's workforce to be made up of citizens, whatever those criteria be determined.
I agree that both topics should be mentioned. But is AI not the main cause here? Basically, companies no longer see the same value prop in hiring highly-paid college grads with CS degrees. What has changed is AI — not their appetite for H1Bs. Maybe AI makes their H1Bs more effective, or maybe it makes their foreign workers in low-cost jurisdictions more effective.
Either way, it's AI that's changing the calculus on whether a Georgetown grad who worked her but off to get in, and to graduate with a CS degree, has lots of highly-paid prospects.
And somehow morons downvote you for speaking the truth.
My friends in India are all doing swimmingly well with the extremely huge increase in offshoring jobs to India. While in the 2000s it was tech support and in the 2010s it was auxiliary tech workers, today it's actual engineers, UX designers, product guys, even HR and admin functions. Turns out, everything can be sent off to India and LatAm, except for sales and department heads. While previously companies would hire right away from IITs to ship them to the US, today they're content with keeping them in India and letting them work remotely.
The impact of AI in corporate jobs is actually very minimal, but the use of it as a smokescreen for downsizing is uncountable.
It would certainly be ironic if offshoring in knowledge work is accelerating just as the consequences of offshoring in manufacturing are coming to a head (well, the social and political visibility of the consequences, anyway).
Whether it's offshoring or AI-shoring, people's expectations for the long-term effects on the workforce and industry know-how sound interchangeable anyway.
Society rewards you if you can give it what it needs, and I guess one of the things society wants right now is Chipotle.
One aspect of college is that it's supposed to teach you how to be a better thinker. One could make the argument that someone who graduated through college should have developed the critical thinking skills required to teach themselves another skill that IS in demand.
What do you tell new grads who can't find a job to do? Learn plumbing, heating/AC, or electrical work? Start a small business?
Sorry but am I the only one skeptical of this narrative? There is no way in hell a Purdue grad cannot at least land a lame IT role at a healthcare provider, the public sector or in the military. The government is turning 21 year olds from prestigious universities with technical degrees away?
Maybe goodbye to six figure tech jobs at fancy company X, just take the high five figure tech job where you'll have to write a lot of boring C# but at least you're getting paid
I find these types of articles from the Times very frustrating. Most of this article is filled with sad anecdotes, but no indication of how those people were chosen. Were they the biggest sob stories found that fit the narrative? Even the data in article is presented in a useless way. CS grads unemployment rates are compared to biology and art history grads (why those in particular?)
I don't doubt that it is much harder to get big salary entry-level work in programming these days. My guess is this is due to a combination of high interest rates / lower investments, flattening business curves, and AI, but the article doesn't try to make a causal case. It just puts forth a bunch of anecdotes sprinkled with a few facts and leaves the reader to infer the causes.
I dream that LLMs will be the disaster that finally convinces the software engineering field that code isn't so "soft" after all, and that software engineering should be licensed, bonded, and insured.
Every single other engineering field has gone through it. "Regulations are written in blood".
Not really, very few fields of engineering are that heavily regulated, and software in safety critical contexts is already heavily regulated. And having seen the sausage made, it's really not that much better. In fact the average web app probably has better quality software than most embedded medical devices, there's just a bare minimum bar of documentation and testing that hopefully stops them killing someone.
[+] [-] trenchpilgrim|7 months ago|reply
This matches my experience. About 90% of the coding tasks I would have assigned to a junior in years past, I can get done for a fraction of the price at a similar quality and in 1/3rd the time by a tool like Claude Code. The only reason I have to hire a junior would be to develop them into a senior over 3-5 years, and companies are far too shortsided to think about that training pipeline.
A good senior engineer still does things the tools can't- in particular, non-programming tasks like planning, persuading, and accountability. I fear that there will be a crisis in these skills as the current seniors retire/change industries in the coming years.
[+] [-] trod1234|7 months ago|reply
If you've as an industry blocked the pipeline saying we don't need these people, time passes and those people who had to invest to get to that point abandon the bad investments, and you get no new people coming in. People leave such industry because of burnout, and aging/retirement/death. The dynamics created are one of a deflationary sieve where the front-loaded cost savings becomes a back-ended cost sink. Tthe demand and related cost of the professionals is recognized at a point where there is great need but they can't be found at any cost. In system's engineering we call this Hysteresis whipsaws, Mises might call this the first early stages of the Economic Calculation Problem.
[+] [-] _DeadFred_|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] amy_petrik|7 months ago|reply
Well and, without special arrangements, once trained for 3-5 years they'd now be more valuable and as easily scooped up by another company - if companies are short-sighted about the training pipeline, so too are employees short-sighted about how long they intend to remain somewhere
[+] [-] AbstractH24|7 months ago|reply
Question I still don't have an answer to is what that career trajectory looks like. I was at a event last week where someone from a popular startup, Clay, described a position (a "GTM engineer") as very intentionally not strategic, but about boots on the ground execution. I came away from the event wondering was "ok, how long until you automate away this line of work?"
[+] [-] toastercat|7 months ago|reply
I know it's common advice for students and newly grads to do this, but in my experience, employers do not care about personal software projects or open-source contributions unless the work is aligned with their product. That, or you built something that is easily lucrative. Otherwise, they do not care, they do not care, they do not care.
If your goal is personal enrichment, by all means, but don't kill yourself on a personal project with the intention of impressing an employer.
[+] [-] chrisnight|7 months ago|reply
Projects are just about the only thing you can add to your resume to show competence. Everyone has a degree, and no one has work experience.
Not only did my projects show that I have completed semi-relevant work in something considered relatively complex, which presumably got me past resume screenings (confirmed by my hiring manager), my projects also gave a prime talking point in interviews that let me showcase my domain knowledge and way that I work. (Consider cliche interview questions like “what is the biggest challenge you’ve faced”, and how they relate to your projects)
This is especially beneficial if you’re being interviewed by other engineers, and you can geek out over a project. Being human and enjoyable, while demonstrating technical competence, is a great interview winner.
Ofc I have limited experience, but small samples can add up if other evidence corroborates with it.
[+] [-] moonmagick|7 months ago|reply
I have no interest in looking at their resume, the first thing I do is look to see if they have a Github and what they've done with it
My green bar on Github and open source contributions have gotten me everything in life. Money, jobs, contracts, community support, etc.
[+] [-] jv22222|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] rcxdude|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] pityJuke|7 months ago|reply
All the sympathies to these people.
[+] [-] ChiMan|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] pfannkuchen|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] HumblyTossed|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] mathiaspoint|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] pjmlp|7 months ago|reply
However people keep rejoicing their use of Claude without looking into the future.
Those cool agents that close tickets on their own, eventually will have an error rate lower than humans.
How many architects does a project need?
[+] [-] tom_m|7 months ago|reply
So I get it, there's not much left...but expecting six figures for your first job is crazy.
[+] [-] mathiaspoint|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] MattGaiser|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] AquilaFasciata|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] mgh2|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] AquilaFasciata|7 months ago|reply
https://sfpl.libanswers.com/faq/166904
[+] [-] herewulf|7 months ago|reply
Even within the article's anecdotes:
> Ms. Mishra, the Purdue graduate, did not get the burrito-making gig at Chipotle. But her side hustle as a beauty influencer on TikTok, she said, helped her realize that she was more enthusiastic about tech marketing and sales than software engineering. [emphasis mine]
Sounds like she was headed down the wrong path to begin with. How many others are like this who have just been riding a hype wave?
Nevertheless, I will say that learning to code is still a useful skill for anyone, even in a future saturated with AI.
[+] [-] jdhn|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] mgh2|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] the_real_cher|7 months ago|reply
Microsoft just laid off thousands and yet are still hiring thousands of H1Bs.
Just one example.
The majority of Adobes jobs on their career page are for foreign workers.
A.I. is misdirection
[+] [-] ProllyInfamous|7 months ago|reply
http://www.h1bdata.info
It shocked me to learn my midsized Southern city (<0.5M MSA) has 1762 H1B jobs, ostensibly because there aren't any qualified Americans; the most common complaint I hear from my peers is that "there aren't enough tech jobs here" when the reality is over 1% of our workforce is underpaid H1Bs, primarily tech field.
I don't think its hateful to want your healthy society's workforce to be made up of citizens, whatever those criteria be determined.
>A.I. is misdirection
It is playing a most useful role for idiots.
[+] [-] apparent|7 months ago|reply
Either way, it's AI that's changing the calculus on whether a Georgetown grad who worked her but off to get in, and to graduate with a CS degree, has lots of highly-paid prospects.
[+] [-] fakedang|7 months ago|reply
My friends in India are all doing swimmingly well with the extremely huge increase in offshoring jobs to India. While in the 2000s it was tech support and in the 2010s it was auxiliary tech workers, today it's actual engineers, UX designers, product guys, even HR and admin functions. Turns out, everything can be sent off to India and LatAm, except for sales and department heads. While previously companies would hire right away from IITs to ship them to the US, today they're content with keeping them in India and letting them work remotely.
The impact of AI in corporate jobs is actually very minimal, but the use of it as a smokescreen for downsizing is uncountable.
[+] [-] blargey|7 months ago|reply
Whether it's offshoring or AI-shoring, people's expectations for the long-term effects on the workforce and industry know-how sound interchangeable anyway.
[+] [-] add-sub-mul-div|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] theanonymousone|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] neuralkoi|7 months ago|reply
One aspect of college is that it's supposed to teach you how to be a better thinker. One could make the argument that someone who graduated through college should have developed the critical thinking skills required to teach themselves another skill that IS in demand.
What do you tell new grads who can't find a job to do? Learn plumbing, heating/AC, or electrical work? Start a small business?
[+] [-] PlattypusRex|7 months ago|reply
The whole point of college is to get a desk job and to avoid manual labor.
Plumbers have to literally scoop poop out with their hands once in a while.
[+] [-] Barrin92|7 months ago|reply
Maybe goodbye to six figure tech jobs at fancy company X, just take the high five figure tech job where you'll have to write a lot of boring C# but at least you're getting paid
[+] [-] nickm12|7 months ago|reply
I don't doubt that it is much harder to get big salary entry-level work in programming these days. My guess is this is due to a combination of high interest rates / lower investments, flattening business curves, and AI, but the article doesn't try to make a causal case. It just puts forth a bunch of anecdotes sprinkled with a few facts and leaves the reader to infer the causes.
[+] [-] xtajv|7 months ago|reply
Every single other engineering field has gone through it. "Regulations are written in blood".
[+] [-] gregorygoc|7 months ago|reply
[+] [-] rcxdude|7 months ago|reply