If you automate a business heavily, it will fail. At least in the sense you people seem to be imagining. You can get away with this at a factory (kind of, but you'll also be out competed by your local community, you won't get tax breaks for hiring people your competitor will, and new types of taxes will be developed to punish you). We reward human collaboration as a society for a reason and punish extreme selfishness, these efforts will fail.
Your bot you call a 'manager' can't actually do anything. You are selling ali-express drop shipped (probably filled with heavy metals) protein for $50.00 (why)?
You're in here actually running the company.. It seems like you have no product, a wrapper maybe.
See the reason you're in here running the company, sharing this link is because humans inherently value the social connection derived from "doing business". Pivot while you can, because this simply is not a paradigm anybody wants. You should read up on commodity fetishism.
Every company that attempts a strategy of full autonomy will automatically get out competed by the human ran company. For many different reasons, but mostly because its rather cheap and lacking any meaning. Even if you had an AI that was capable of doing so (you don't), people want human connection, they want the meaning behind things. We don't do business just for the sake of producing pieces of paper..
I would argue half the reason to have "businesses" is to employee your fellow community members, a tide that lifts all boats so you can live in a decent society. There's so missing here. You llm grifters are really losing the plot, not everything is about money (even if we would like it to be).
You must have incredibly low standards for quality if you think manual coding will be finished any time soon, web dev or any.
secondly, using llms well still requires you to be a great programmer. Y'all are losing the plot.
Also, just because its easier to do doesnt mean everyone is suddenly going to want to do it. There's still always going to be only a small percentage of thr world that likes to build things.
Have you seen the code these things produce? Just because it compiles/ runs/ loads does not mean its durable. Its wild you people have these opinions, and it leads me to belive you have no idea what you're talking about.
There is mass dunning kruger due to llms, and people are speaking with way too much authority about things they do not understand. I hate this website.
Yeah completely unmaintainable code that cant handle more than 1k users before it collapses on itself. And quite probably so ugly its literally impossible to use.
That only matters if you need to support 1k users. Tons of software doesn't and if you can spit out a web app in a few hours a lot of companies are going to do that.
I'm sure there is still a pot for really high quality stuff but it's a tradeoff a lot of companies don't care. But the interfaces - they aren't ugly, they're very usable and complete, which is the main reason I think web dev is in trouble. It'd take me 10x the time to do it myself.
Simple web apps, the kind you're describing have never been difficult, they were never what kept SWEs employed.
I'm not even sure what you're talking about when you say "web apps", because the kind of "web apps" that have kept SWEs employed are created by large organizations that have large requirements. You sound like you don't know what you're talking about. Companies also aren't going to just stop growing, iterating and improving, which requires expertise. Im worth more than ever with AI, my value as a SWE has only been increasing.
You people seriously need to stop using LLMs because your brains are devolving like taxi cabs drivers who had parts of their brains responsible for navigation atrophy after the advent of GPS.
> Simple web apps, the kind you're describing have never been difficult, they were never what kept SWEs employed.
I'd say the first part is right but the second part is statistically incorrect. I would even expand from "web-apps" to just about any kind of software, especially "business software" -- very little of it was ever too difficult.
Now the following will clearly not be true for all cases, and the boundaries are very fuzzy, but generally a huge part of software development has always been the relatively straightforward translation of high-level requirements into code. Crafting the high-level requirements was typically the challenging part, but that typically was done by the more senior devs / architects, whereas the actual implementation was done by more junior / mid-level engineers. And there were typically multiple junior / mid-level devs for every senior dev, say 3:1 or more. As such, it is correct to say that the simpler aspects of software development were what kept most SWEs employed.
Now AI has completely usurped the lower-level coding work. You as an expert dev are definitely getting worth more than ever with AI, but that's because you single-handedly can now do what an entire team used to do. You may even get paid much more, but that is eventually going to be at the expense of a bunch of other people who are not required anymore.
This is why people are seeing "jobs apocalypse" written on the wall.
I don't get why you're being so rude. What's the point?
For the record, I hardly use these models. I've simply seen that they can replace existing web apps. That hurts the market for web devs, most orgs aren't building out large apps they are building out smallish ones and generative models do that today.
Sorry, Ive been hearing these exact same arguments for 3 years now and its always extermely divorced from reality. Its starting to get very tiring, its hard not to be rude at a certain point.
Don't go around telling people their careers are in peril when you clearly have no clue what you're talking about. What do you expect?
You've identified a very specific type of web dev, one that works on perf critical apps in a corp environment and said corp cares about perf and quality. Tons of people simply don't work in those environments and unfortunately this threatens their career.
I work in an environment where we can vibecode 4/5 of our web apps because they are either small enough or the perf doesn't matter. Or, I've looked under the hood and these are writing endpoints that would take me 3x the amount of time it would take it to use the same libraries. You say it's divorced from reality, I'm saying it's just what I've directly observed.
I'm glad it doesn't affect you, but you don't have any kind of statistical measurement (nor do I) to know how much of the market this impacts. I do know for a lot of the web dev I did pereviously, I could do it viea these models today.
Or just don't use these hacky solutions and just make a gd ecom website. It's 2026, use claude if you have too. There is no reason for shopify to exist (or wordpress for that matter, but at least wordpress isn't for profit). They say AI should kill SaaS, but it should actually kill all these dumb abstraction PaaS.
I say this as someone who has recently helped a few friends move their ecom stores off shopify, and wow, I didn't know such a horrible paradigm could exist. I genuinely think it would be easier for someone to learn a web stack in 2026 than learn to piece together whatever spaghetti monster shopify, and similar hacks are.
Claims without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.
Signal is not robust for metadata protection. Neither do they advertise anonymity. They take steps to protect metadata but it's nothing compared to SimpleX.
If it's "the feds", then how? There's reproducible builds on all platforms except iOS so we know the source code is what's running on our devices. Can you point to the code where the E2EE is compromised?
They are the largest messenger that has E2EE backups by default.
If I was the NSA, I would be using the fact that signal uses AWS for their backend combined with the cudgel that .us.gov has with the AWS govcloud contract to mandate that all traffic to and from signal's backend also gets routed to NSA traffic analysis servers, which could then be correlated with other sources like ISP data to get a pretty complete record of all Signal message metadata.
To be clear, I use signal pretty heavily, but that's because my threat model doesn't really include competent .us.gov actors. I don't think that they'd either prove they're doing this or go through the trouble of parallel construction over anything in my messages or who I'm talking to.
Nobody is arguing the e2ee isn't valid, its useful as a metadata collection platform, which is all they care about. Former NSA and CIA Director Michael Hayden famously stated: “We kill people based on metadata." and then he tried to hold back a smile and said "but not with this metadata". It's usefulness as a metadata collection platform becomes much less useful if people don't trust it, so of course it's secure.
If you can convince as many of your enemies (the american people who politically organize against them) to use the same platform, your job becomes easier than having to ETL from 20 different privacy platforms..
To be honest, I use signal, I have nothing to hide but it is useful in that nobody can spoof me (easily). I even talk to my 60 year old mother on signal. It has it's uses. But the EFF is definitely a federal psyop to get people using tools and techniques they control.
Just look at the people who created TOR, they're all feds. All these projects are funded by feds. These tools are advertised in CIA recruitment campaigns, they are literal weapons to circumvent nation state firewalls and deliver psychological weapons, overthrow governments or allow covert recruitment of foreign traitors.
I'll see your conspiracy theory and raise you one: What if the feds fund tech privacy projects specifically so that people like you won't trust them, and instead embrace privacy nihilism?
This is a known strategy of the Kremlin, by the way. They fund opposition groups which protest them, and then leak the fact of that funding so that people who are genuinely upset at the Kremlin get confused about who is captured opposition and who is legitimate.
It can be a signal in some cases, but funding sources are not a reliable way to make a conclusion about a group's motivations.
>Signal is for protecting opposition groups that help in regime change operations
SMS registration flow is trivially blocked in places where regimes are controlling telecom infra. And Twilio is unreliable in dozens of places for non-political reasons. Signal is very first-world centric from this point of view.
Openrouter isn't even 00.01% of tokens used on a daily basis. China alone uses 500 Trillion tokens a day and they're only 1/8th of the world. Much of the world has a google account, use your brain.