I don't get this idea that to build a stable product you must make your life hard as much as possible.
One can use ai AND build stable products at the same time. These are not exactly opposing goals, and even above that assuming that ai will always generate bad code itself is wrong.
Very likely people will build both stable and large products using ai than ever before.
I understand and empathise with you, moving on is hard, especially when these kind of huge paradigm changing events arrive, especially when you are no longer in the upswing of life. But the arguments you are making are very similar to those made by boomers about desktops, internet and even mobile phones. People have argued endlessly how the old way was better, but things only get better with newer technology that automates more things than ever before.
I don't feel like you read my comment in context. It was quite specifically responding to the GP's point of pursuing "bigger and better" software, which just isn't something more senior engineers would claim to pursue.
I completely agree with you that "one can use ai AND build stable products at the same time", even in the context of the conversation we're having in the other reply chain.
But I think we greatly disagree about having encountered a "paradigm changing event" yet. As you can see throughout the comments here, many senior engineers recognize the tools we've seen so far for what they are, they've explored their capabilities, and they've come to understand where they fit into the work they do. And they're simply not compelling for many of us yet. They don't work for the problems we'd need them to work for yet, and are often found to be clumsy and anti-productive for the problems they can address.
It's cute and dramatic to talk about "moving on is hard" and "luddism" and some emotional reaction to a big scary immanent threat, but you're mostly talking to exceedingly practical and often very-lazy people who are always looking for tools to make their work more effective. Broadly, we're open to and even excited about tools that could be revolutionary and paradigm changing and many of us even spend our days trying to discover build those tools. A more accurate read of what they're saying in these conversations is that we're disappointed with these and in many cases and just find that they don't nearly deliver on their promise yet.
One can use ai AND build stable products at the same time. These are not exactly opposing goals, and even above that assuming that ai will always generate bad code itself is wrong.
Very likely people will build both stable and large products using ai than ever before.
I understand and empathise with you, moving on is hard, especially when these kind of huge paradigm changing events arrive, especially when you are no longer in the upswing of life. But the arguments you are making are very similar to those made by boomers about desktops, internet and even mobile phones. People have argued endlessly how the old way was better, but things only get better with newer technology that automates more things than ever before.