Some people blog because it makes them happy, others do so to build brand and status for professional development.

Upon reading this, it seems like the author is in the latter group, and while he offers a few points about what computers can and can't do, the advice given is horrible advice because it takes things in isolation and overgeneralizes, while not paying attention to underlying factors.

The "lets just tough it out" approach and specialize in old code, or learning to do what AI can't are impossible tasks in practice.

If the author is in the latter group, I think he's unintentionally doing himself a disservice by showing a low level of competency in addressing the problems.

You don't want to hire an engineer who is blind to the potential liabilities they create.

Any engineers in IT are intimately familiar with the fallout from failures involving sequential steps in a pipeline.

There's front-of-line blocking (FOLB), and there's single points of failure (SPOFs), these are considered in resiliency design or documentation of the failure domains. The most important parts of which are used in identifying liabilities upfront before they happen.

Entry level task positions are easily automated by AI. So companies replace the workers, with AI.

How do you get to be a mid-level engineer when the entry level no longer exists...its all based upon years of experience. Experience which can no longer be gotten.

Does this sound like a pipeline yet?

You still have mid-level engineers available, as you do senior engineers, but no new ones are entering the marketplace. Aging removes these people over time, and as that sieves towards 0 the cost of hiring these people goes up until it reaches infinite (where no one can be hired).

What goes into the pipeline is typically the same but most often less than what comes out of said pipeline. In talent development its a sieve separating the wheat from the chaff.

Only the entry point is clogged, and nothing new is going in, humans deal with future expectations and the volume going into such pipelines is adaptive. No future, no one goes into such professions.

After a certain point, you can't find talent. There's no economic incentive because companies made it this way by collusion.

Things stop getting done which forces collapse of the company. Its not just one company because this is a broad problem, so this happens across the board creating a inflationary cycle of cost, followed by a correlated deflationary cycle in talent, that cannot be fixed except by the industry as a whole removing the blockage. They can't do that though because of short-term competition.

When have industry business-people today turned on a dime in economically challenging situations where the money wasn't available; ever.

Debt financing makes it so these people don't need to examine these trends more than a year out, but the consequences of these trends can occur just outside that horizon, and once integrated the bridges have been burnt and there is no going back while also maintaining marketshare.

All of the incentives force business people to drive everything into the ground in these type of cycles. The only solution, is to know ahead of time, and not bait the hook. The business people of today have shown that this is beyond them, its all about short-term profits at the limits of growth, business as usual.

Real world consequences of such, you can look to Thomas Malthus, and Catton who revisits Malthus.

Catton importantly shows how extraction of non-renewables can reduce or destroy previous existing renewable flows leading to lower population limits as a whole than prior to before prior to overshoot.

Similar behavior applies broadly to destructive phase changes of super critical systems with complex feedback mechanisms (i.e. negative flips to positive and runs away, or vice versa leading to collapse/halt). In other words where you have two narrow boundaries outside which the systems fail.