An Astra powered site is your representation of a polished and capable business website. For the average joe, a Wix website fits the bill, their representation is not the same as yours. They focus on items such as whether or not the theme is beautiful.

I mean Wordpress been around for decades, it’s solid, mature and everywhere. I’d even say way better than any vibe coded site

Oh I see! Thanks for explaining that - I did notice that sometimes a subset that I didn't expect was chosen.

Did the LLM explain its reasoning for how it is showing the higher dimensions? Or perhaps this is a standard way of attempting to display higher dimensional space?

They don't do it by default all the time but if prompted to they're pretty good at designing and refactoring code

I'm increasingly finding my job is just making sure they don't go off the rails, and if they do it's a small effort of getting them back on track

Tech debt when doing a website? If it’s just a CMS, Claude and Codex are more than capable of building and maintaining it.

Also, planning over long scales is not something you should do if you do lean/agile. Premature optimization is a root of all evil ;)

look at the accounting firms, you'll just have four or five companies that switch off between who holds the bag

This is truly depressing and most likely very true.

I do not see enough people discussing this and trying to position their businesses in a way to avoid destruction at the hands of the labs.

> And it will be good enough for 90% of use cases.

I think it’ll just raise the automation bar that much higher. In other words, it will be good enough for 90% of yesterday’s use-cases. But tomorrow’s? I’m bearish.

I imagine the amount of onerous bureaucracy when interacting with any entity is going to explode if they expect you to do it in an automated fashion, for both private companies and the government. Especially as roles are cut because they can be “automated”. Except only 80% of the workload can be reliably automated, the other 20% requires a long tail of effort.

And whose neck can you choke when an error from the AI generated site forces you to refund customers or something worse?

given the percentage of business processes that still run on a manually updated spreadsheet, I am not sure that is actually worse.

It is likely better in some ways and worse in others...and few of hte people involved will have the understanding to tell the difference.

You're not crazy. I think there's still room for the top 5% of devs working on genuinely hard technical problems.. but I don't see a bright future for the rest.

There’s going to be a lot of chaos at some point but I think that “hybrid builders” (scientists, sales people, product developers, etc). true specialists, and new opportunities in hw/robotics/training/ will soak up a lot of talent, and be rewarding to work in. Feels very sadly k-shaped.

Software engineering on one end is going to be more like finance or medicine where the cost of poor performance is actually higher than the risk that they wont be worth what you pay them (ie there isn’t any amount of pay where it’s worth it to hire them). Then on the other it’ll be like knowing how to use PowerPoint. All the new tech categories have too many bottlenecks and challenges beyond just producing code to consolidate like that.

Salaries won't fall, they'll go up. The number of roles is what'll fall. SWE is going to become a giant game of musical chairs, and people who can't find a seat will get pushed into human facing roles ("product" / "technical sales" / "customer support" ).

No. Saas hedge is to offer solid api + mcp for agents to use whilst still maintaining their own products alongside. That's it, that's the whole thing.

Are you going to trust a vendor who has been running for years with your business critical operations or brad_69's awesome saas skills and agents? Do you think these businesses are going to shift their whole product to be in Altman's walled garden when they don't need to?

In a corporate environment the ability to code does not substitute a decent software engineer.

Nah. Website builders have been around for a long time in various forms. This isn't much different.

I've said it before but I'll repeat it here until someone changes my mind: jobs in IT are safe until using AI gets its equivalent of "no one ever got fired for buying IBM". Until there can be financial and legal responsibility for when things go bad, people are going to be needed. Once it's so good AI labs will be happy to accept liability, it's game over. It was never about code quality.

Slapping up a slop website is no threat to professional tech folk.

When they have full DevOps, with multiple environments for testing, compliance with security best practices, can do database updates and data migrations, move the app smoothly between different platforms, streamline costs, and scale to at least hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of users without crashing and burning... then go ahead and worry. We aren't anywhere near that.

On the other hand, if you are purely a coder, and cannot run a project that does all of the above... maybe start your worrying earlier.

Coding is probably solved. Honestly it’s probably going to be 5 years of runtime starting now depending on industry lag and uptake.

A team I was managing spent a whole year converting government forms into a web app. It took a while and there was a lot of discussion with the end users and a bunch of back and forth (keep in mind this is government software with a lot of onerous legal requirements). Then about 4 months ago, we just fed Codex the forms, along with the UI design and the legal requirements and it spat it out in 1 hour. Was it perfect? No. But our iterative loop became make the web app, show it to end users and then incorporate feedback and completely cut out the UX team, product etc. We were able to complete the conversion in 2 weeks with one guy (something like 150+ government forms/applications). For most simple to medium corporate development work it’s basically over.

The argument there wasn't that everyone everywhere would use individually customized software* instead of packaged SaaS; it was that, because AI greatly reduces the cost of building an internal app or service, it improves enterprises' BATNA when dealing with SaaS vendors, which means surplus will shift from producers to consumers. It's not obvious to me that that's not happening, since it may have been masked by a general increase in automation since AI also synergizes significantly with SaaS. (The Stripe Economics post gets into this a little, though it's mostly less curious than I'd like about why the "SaaSpocalypse" didn't materialize. Of course, Stripe has an economic interest here.)

* Some people do think this (e.g., https://sockpuppet.org/blog/2026/09/25/what-even-is-an-os-no...), but I remain somewhat skeptical that this'll be true for the most economically significant applications. This is not because I'm an AI capabilities skeptic (I'm not, I'm more of a doomer), but because even in a world where AI is designing and implementing all the software, there are probably still significant benefits to standardization. I see it as sort of analogous to compilers; we might get a world where compilers are both used and maintained almost exclusively by LLMs, but we probably won't get one where compilers stop being used or maintained at all because LLMs write everything in assembly.