What’s left unsaid: many programmers can’t or don’t want to “accomplish something for people”. They just want to code.
Such “automation is not a problem, because…” opinions have something in common: they’re looking at a subset of the affected population which has some trait making the transition easier.
Personally I’ve tried my hand at roles like architect, product owner, scrum master, etc and I was involved in most aspects of a software product’s lifecycle. These other roles are very different to coding and for someone that enjoys the simplicity of taming a machine, even exhausting.
I have my doubts that there will be enough “AI guide” jobs for all programmers, but the specific person Carmack’s talking to may indeed be fine.
The purpose of software companies is to earn money not to give jobs to people who "want to code".
Lots of people learned how to make games for NES, SNES, PS2, PS3, etc.
All those machines are now obsolete.
Current gen consoles are using x86 and ARM now and most upcoming AAA games are built on Unreal Engine.
The competitive advantage of those who mastered coding for the Cell processor is gone.
What should SONY have done instead?
Should they still use the PS3 architecture in the current gen consoles to keep those developers employed?
Such “automation is not a problem, because…” opinions have something in common: they’re looking at a subset of the affected population which has some trait making the transition easier.
Personally I’ve tried my hand at roles like architect, product owner, scrum master, etc and I was involved in most aspects of a software product’s lifecycle. These other roles are very different to coding and for someone that enjoys the simplicity of taming a machine, even exhausting.
I have my doubts that there will be enough “AI guide” jobs for all programmers, but the specific person Carmack’s talking to may indeed be fine.