After spending a decent amount of time with ChatGPT and Claude, AI has become an essential part of the way I work. I wouldn’t want to be without it now. It’s made me more efficient in both my writing and my software development, and it’s slotted into my workflow far more naturally than I ever expected.
But, and this is important, I’m not sitting back and letting it just get on with it and neither should anyone else.
The Myth of “Vibe Coding”
There’s a perception floating around, often from people who don’t write software, that AI has unlocked a magical new world where anyone can describe an idea and AI will churn out production ready code without oversight, testing, maintenance, or even understanding.
This is, frankly, nonsense.
AI is powerful, but it isn’t a replacement for software engineering. You still have to check the output, iterate on it, shape it, correct it, and guide it. You still need to understand the constraints, the architecture, the data model, the error modes, and the trade‑offs. You still need to own the design.
“Vibe coding” isn’t engineering. It’s prompt‑driven prototyping. And prototypes are not products.
Two Strands of AI Use in Software
From where I’m standing, there are two very different types of AI‑driven “software development” happening right now:
1. The “Anyone Can Build Anything” Fantasy
This is the idea that AI democratises software to the point where domain expertise, experience, engineering discipline, and architectural thinking are optional. Just ask the model for an app, a system, a feature, whatever, and it does the rest.
No tests.
No reviews.
No maintenance.
No accountability.
This mindset is building up a bubble. And bubbles burst.
2. Ai as a Productivity Tool for Engineers
Then there’s the strand I live in: using AI as a productivity tool. Not a replacement for experience, but an amplifier of it. When used well, AI lets software engineers:
- explore ideas faster
- write boilerplate less
- get unstuck sooner
- iterate quicker
- document more cleanly
- and keep more of their headspace free for real engineering work
It doesn’t do the thinking for you, it creates more room to think. The people who can employ AI effectively are the same people who already understand how to build scalable, maintainable software. AI doesn’t eliminate the need for engineering discipline; it makes that discipline even more valuable.
The Bubble Is Real
I believe we’re heading toward a correction. Maybe in six months, maybe in twelve. But it’s coming.
Right now, non‑engineers are experimenting with AI‑generated software and believing it will carry them all the way to production. For small scripts, demos, or toys, maybe it will, but building something that lasts, something that scales, something that behaves as expected in the messy real world, still requires engineering fundamentals. AI won’t magically fill those gaps for people who don’t have them.
When the bubble bursts, the gold rush around “AI software development for non‑developers” will fade, and the real value will settle firmly where it belongs: in the hands of experienced engineers who are now significantly more productive than they were before.
That’s the real revolution.
Not replacement, acceleration.
The Future Belongs to Engineers Who Embrace the Tools
I may have been a reluctant adopter, but I’m fully converted now. AI has changed the way I work, not by writing software for me, but by helping me write better software faster. I don’t believe AI is here to take our jobs. I believe it’s here to make good engineers more productive.
And those who learn to combine their expertise with these new tools will be the ones who shape what comes next.
I’ve been asked many times recently what my thoughts on AI are. I’ve got limited experience so far, and my opinions come from some usage of Claude Code and ChatGP, Linkedin posts and talking to colleagues. I gave my thoughts to ChapGPT, told it what I wanted to say and how I wanted to say it. What you’ve read above is the result, plus some minor editing.
.png)
Comments
Post a Comment