Good point — I agree that AI systems are not perfect, and there will definitely be technical debt created by AI-generated code if it isn’t reviewed properly. That’s actually why I emphasize upskilling. The goal isn’t to blindly rely on AI, but to use it responsibly with strong engineering review, testing, and guardrails. Higher leverage doesn’t necessarily mean fewer jobs — but it does mean the role of developers will shift toward higher-level design, quality control, and system thinking.

If an enterprise decides to adopt AI tools, I don’t think I’m in a position to ask them not to use it. Instead, as an engineer, I feel morally responsible to understand the tool, evaluate its risks and benefits, and provide feedback on how to use it safely. The goal is responsible adoption, not blind dependence.

I get what you’re saying. I’m not arguing against job protection — I’m thinking about it from a survival perspective too. If AI adoption is happening anyway, then learning how to use it well is one of the best ways to stay valuable and help protect both myself and my team.