AI won't replace programmers — it devalues them

AI and programmers: the antiestéticar of replacement hides something more uncomfortable

His name is Claude, and according to one software engineer, a high school graduate with that tool can do his job for 300 euros less. The scene captures the vertigo felt by an entire profession: years of study and late nights of debugging turned into a commodity to be bargained down. "Machines are going to replace us all," says the author of the confession, and it's no rhetorical exaggeration.

The first practical answer came from those with decades in the trade: if all you know is writing code, you're lost; if you use AI as a tool, you still have the edge. The veteran who started out on a Spectrum scoffs at the "privilege" of grinding twelve hours a day only for a graduate with an API to take his job for 300 euros less. And some go further: well-managed AI in the public sector could free people from tedious work, provided it doesn't end up in the hands of "friendly consultancies" for 50 million. That's exactly where the optimism slips: the same people who can't build a working dating app are going to regulate this for the common good.

Meanwhile, code produced in a hurry with no technical judgment already has a name: "vibecoding." Some defend the craft as artisanal work, not engineering; others prefer to see it as an opportunity for the productive freelancer. The uncomfortable question remains: will a programmer's value be measured by their ability to direct AI, or by their willingness to accept a 400-euro pay cut?