“No context, no truth.”
Artificial Intelligence is no longer a futuristic dream; it is a real-time shredder of job profiles. And in this new field of professional extinction, programmers are on the front line. The myth said they were untouchable. That myth just died.
A recent report highlighted by ComputerHoy summarizes a thesis now echoed by increasingly authoritative voices: there are only two kinds of programmers left.
Those who will lose their jobs to AI, and those who will keep—or gain—one because of it.
The dividing line isn’t ethical or technical. It’s strategic. Meaning: survival depends less on code… and more on foresight.
“Copy-Paste Developers”: Replacement Fodder
On one side of the battlefield are those who “know how to code,” but whose entire workflow is built on recycling: copying snippets from Stack Overflow, gluing templates, reusing scripts, and following tutorials they don’t fully understand.
They don’t grasp why things work. They just know they “work.”
That era is over. GPT, Copilot, and any decent LLM can write their code faster, cleaner, and with fewer errors. If your job can be automated in less than 30 seconds, it’s not a profession. It’s a routine. And routines in the 21st century don’t survive. They get replaced.
The Architects of the Algorithm: Allies of the Machine
On the other side are the actual engineers.
Not the code typists — the system thinkers.
They understand how frameworks behave. They analyze architectural decisions. They know that AI can autocomplete, but it cannot conceptualize. And above all, they use AI tools like GitHub Copilot as copilots, not drivers.
Their value isn’t speed.
Their value is comprehension.
AI doesn’t eliminate their work — it amplifies their power.
Code Is Language, Not Just Instructions
Programming is often misunderstood as a mechanical exercise: turning ideas into machine commands. But code is also a language with context, intention, abstraction, and structure. AI can help you write, but if you don’t understand what you’re writing, you’re already obsolete.
The programmers who survive won’t be the fastest typists.
They will be the ones who think.
The ones who understand systems.
The ones who formulate problems clearly.
Because AI is exceptional at solving… whatever is formulated well.
Thinking will matter more than typing.
Architecture more than syntax.
Strategy more than speed.
Programmers Aren’t Being Replaced by GPT
They’re being replaced by programmers who use GPT better than they do.
AI didn’t come to kill professions.
It came to punish complacency and reward adaptability.
Ironically, many who once mocked bank tellers, translators, and graphic designers now feel the scythe grazing their own necks. Karma? No. Pure logic.
“Don’t compete against AI. Use it. Or you’ll be used by it.”
Chronicle of a Foretold Job Apocalypse
In the new digital hierarchy, code won’t save you.
Only knowing why you write code will.
Tech gurus preach about a utopia where AI frees up time for “human creativity.” Reality says the opposite: AI is pruning the workforce, not liberating it. It’s debugging the labor market. And in every debugging process, the first casualties aren’t the useless — but the unnecessary.
The popular phrase circulating inside engineering circles —
“There are two kinds of programmers: those who will be replaced by AI and those who will keep jobs thanks to it” —
is not a metaphor. It’s an obituary.
AI doesn’t think.
But neither do many of the developers it’s replacing.
Thousands of coders celebrate that Copilot “saves time.”
What they don’t realize is that it’s also devaluing them.
Every line of code AI writes for you is a line of code that no longer justifies your salary.
Survival won’t depend on typing fast, but on thinking deeply.
On understanding architectures.
On designing systems.
On knowing how models work, not just how to prompt them.
The difference between generating prompts and designing AI systems is the difference between driving a car and building an engine.
One is common.
The other is rare.
And if one day AI replaces even the architects — which is still far away — the game will shift again. It won’t be about programming anymore. It will be about governance, algorithmic ethics, data navigation, and automated decision structures.
Code is no longer sacred.
AI broke the illusion.
Writing code now is as common as writing emails.
The value lies in purpose — something AI doesn’t have.
But neither do programmers who think code is an end instead of a means.
This isn’t the end of programming.
It’s the end of the programmer who doesn’t know why he works.
And that species won’t be killed by AI.
It will die through inertia.
English 
Spanish 