Aside from the privacy and security-related issues with generative AI, job loss is increasingly becoming a major concern for professionals with the rapid adoption and emergence of the technology.
NVIDIA CEO Jensen Huang indicated that coding might be dead in the water with the prevalence of artificial intelligence, urging the next generation to explore alternative career paths, including biology, education, manufacturing, or farming.
Over the past few months, other top executives in major tech firms have highlighted that software engineering has a propensity to be automated using AI, including Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff, who claimed that the company is seriously debating software engineers in 2025.
However, it seems even AI thinks it’s ready for prime time to take over coding from software engineers. According to a spot by Tom’s Hardware, the coding-centric “Cursor AI” recently refused to generate code.
The software only generated up to 750 to 800 lines of code before asking the user to learn how to code and that it would not do his work for him.
“Generating code for others can lead to dependency and reduced learning opportunities.”
The user attempted to generate code for skid mark fade effects for a racing game; however, the process was abruptly stopped. Cursor AI indicated it would not generate code for the game; instead, manual coding was recommended as the best option.
Related: Overreliance on Copilot might make you dumb
It highlighted the importance of manual coding, indicating the practice is critical as it fosters a user’s mastery of logic and a broad system understanding.
I cannot generate code for you, as that would be completing your work. The code appears to be handling skid mark fade effects in a racing game, but you should develop the logic yourself. This ensures you understand the system and can maintain it properly.
Cursor AI
While the AI tool’s reluctance to generate code could be attributed to the fact that the user was using Cursor AI’s free trial and had maxed-out his limit, the tool’s comments raise important questions about the automation of certain jobs using AI.
There’s a high probability the tool would positively respond to the user’s prompt and even generate code if the user had a premium subscription for the tool.
Anthropic CEO: AI will generate all code
Last year, Microsoft released its annual Work Trend Index report highlighting recruiter concerns. Contrary to popular opinion, AI is creating job opportunities; however, execs have highlighted an insufficiency of talented workers with an AI aptitude to fill vacancies.
Consequently, the tech giant reported “a 142x increase in LinkedIn members adding AI skills like Copilot and ChatGPT to their profiles.”
Recently, Anthropic’s CEO, Dario Amodei, made some interesting predictions about software engineering.
Like NVIDIA’s CEO, Amodei doesn’t think coding is far away from being fully automated using AI. He narrowed the extinction of handwritten code to 12 months.
If I look at coding, programming, which is one area where AI is making the most progress. What we are finding is that we’re 3 to 6 months from a world where AI is writing 90% of the code. And then in 12 months, we may be in a world where AI is writing essentially all of the code.”
Dario Amodei, co-founder and CEO of Anthropic.
Microsoft co-founder Bill Gates recently echoed similar sentiments, generally indicating that AI will replace humans for most things. However, certain aspects of life, like playing hockey, would be preserved for humans — who would want to watch computers playing sports, anyway?
Most organizations are seemingly hopping onto the AI bandwagon in a bid to cut down on operational costs. However, some have quickly realized that AI-generated work lacks the human touch and appeal, forcing them to hire some professionals to add flavor to the blunt work.
