AI 工程师也难逃被 AI 取代的命运。
AI Engineers aren't safe from being replaced by AI

原始链接: https://dmanco.dev/2025/08/17/fear-not-even-ai-engineers-will-be-replaced-by-ai.html

与普遍认为 AI 工程师不会被取代的看法相反,作者认为他们实际上可能比普通软件开发人员更容易受到冲击。 问题的核心在于对“AI”的定义。目前,这个词涵盖了从简单的搜索算法到复杂的大语言模型(LLM)等各种技术,范围过于宽泛。然而,行业正趋向整合:大型通用基础模型正日益“吞噬”专业 AI 分支。随着这些模型变得更加多功能、强大且能够近乎实时地实现专业化,对定制化 AI 开发的需求将会减少。最终,大多数公司会发现使用“即插即用”的通用模型比聘用专门的 AI 工程师更具成本效益。 虽然软件开发人员在将这些模型集成到功能性应用程序中(需要人工监督和领域知识)时仍不可或缺,但 AI 工程师这一专业角色正面临被其所构建的技术本身所吞没的风险。随着模型的不断改进,对定制化 AI 研究的需求可能会萎缩,仅留下大型科技公司里的顶尖研究人员,从而导致更广阔的市场趋于饱和。

近期 Hacker News 上的一场讨论探讨了一个引发争议的观点:AI 工程师极易被他们所开发的这项技术所取代。 此次辩论重点关注了以下几个问题: * **训练陷阱:** 批评者认为,工程师对 AI 的依赖在无意中训练了能够取代自身的模型。雇主可能会记录并利用这些数据来自动化未来的工作流程,最终导致人工投入变得多余。 * **技能与工具:** 许多参与者认为,单纯的代码生成是远远不够的。最有可能生存下来的工程师,是那些拥有深厚领域专业知识的人,他们能够对 AI 生成的代码进行严格的评估、调试和维护。 * **生产力悖论:** 持怀疑态度的人指出,如果 AI 提高了某位工程师的效率,那么该工程师反而更容易被其他更擅长利用这些工具的人所取代。 * **行业否认:** 对话反映了两种观点之间的分歧:一方认为软件工程是人类独有的,另一方则认为当前的职业自信是一种错觉。 归根结底,共识表明,虽然 AI 工具正变得不可或缺,但长期的职业保障将取决于深入的理解,而不仅仅是“驾驭”提示词的能力。
相关文章

原文

It quickly became small talk; whenever I speak with a fellow engineer working in tech, we somehow always end up in the same direction:

“AI agents are getting so smart nowadays, my job will eventually be replaced by them. You don’t have to worry about this instead. You are an AI engineer, you create AIs, you cannot be replaced.”

My face takes a specific expression at this point, showing some sort of discomfort, mixed with a “how do I explain this now in simple terms?” kind of face. The kind of face you have when you meet a stranger in the elevator and you don’t know how to act.

The fact is, it will be very likely that my job will be replaced sooner than most developer jobs.

Let’s dive into the reasons why I think this, starting by defining what an AI engineer is.


What exactly is an AI engineer?

The idea for this post came after seeing this image on my LinkedIn feed:

Book page

This excerpt was posted by Arvind Narayanan, and it comes from his book “AI Snake Oil: What Artificial Intelligence Can Do, What It Can’t, and How to Tell the Difference”, written together with Sayash Kapoor.

Although I didn’t read the book myself, I think this introduction explains the current situation with AI — and AI engineers — very well. At this moment in the world, artificial intelligence is everything and nothing at the same time.
ChatGPT is AI, the software that post-processes images on your camera phone is AI, the algorithm that selects the best commercials to show you on social media is AI, the non-playing characters on your latest videogame are AI.
And yet, these four types of artificial intelligence are very different from each other.

ChatGPT is an LLM, a transformer-based architecture with billions of parameters.
The image processing algorithms on your phone are likely small and efficient convolutional neural networks designed to work with the computational power of your (relatively) tiny device.
Recommender systems are quite complicated, and they could use many different kinds of technologies specifically engineered for the field of application.
The AI of NPCs in video games are often just classical pathfinding and search algorithms, like A*.

Technologically speaking, the knowledge you need to develop any of these AIs is different from each other. Sure, some of the underground fundamentals are the same — in the end, neural networks are almost everywhere — but going back to the figurative examples used in the image above, you can say that both the car and the bike use wheels, but you wouldn’t call a bike shop to fix your car’s wheel — or a car mechanic to fix the engine of a rocket.

So how do we differentiate between these AIs? The answer is: we don’t.
Currently, everything is marketed as “Artificial Intelligence” without any clarification of what this means. And this affects the job title too; a person having the “AI engineer” title could literally do everything. I have even seen many people claiming they were AI engineers while they were just using ChatGPT APIs to build their software.

If I start looking for a job as an AI engineer, I would receive job offers of any possible kind of AI out there that I don’t even care about.
On the opposite side, since I mainly work with images, I could say I’m a Computer Vision Engineer, and I would receive tons of job offers that have nothing to do with AI, since Computer Vision is a far wider field than only AI.

So, what exactly is an AI engineer? Well, I came to the conclusion that it is whatever you want it to be.


Why are you worried that you will be replaced?

It’s an understandable question. I just said that AI is an umbrella term that encapsulates many different kinds of subjects. LLMs like ChatGPT are only a part of what is called AI.
So why should I be worried?

The thing is, these LLMs and foundation models are becoming so general that they are starting to include way more domains under their “side” of the AI world. Just a few days ago, Meta released their new version of DINO, a versatile, powerful and efficient vision model that could be easily applied to different tasks with very little work. Without using annotations and with very good performances. No more need to do research about a certain topic — you already have a plug-and-play solution that will probably work for many applications.

This is the direction AI is taking: cannibalizing all the other branches of AI into general models that can be applied to everything. Why bother tailoring a solution to a specific problem when you can just use the latest generalization breakthrough from big tech? We’ll eventually reach a point where having AI engineers and researchers will no longer be convenient for most companies. The best AI researchers will be concentrated in big tech, and the rest of the market will be highly saturated. Tailored AI solutions will become a luxury that most companies will happily avoid.

Luckily, this isn’t the case yet. General models still aren’t specialized enough for many domains — especially when data from those domains is scarce or difficult to obtain. It’s not possible to achieve the best outcomes by only relying on a general model. But give it a few years, and this will change. Models will become so general that with only a small sample from the domain you want to apply them to, they’ll quickly specialize for that application.

Most AI engineers will be replaced by AI sooner than software developers, who will still be needed to integrate these AI models into applications.
And I don’t think AI agents can steal their jobs completely — not yet, at least. Someone still has to use the AI to build the application they want, and that person needs the knowledge to ensure the AI is doing the right thing in the best way possible. This isn’t something AI can fully replace, since agents need a user, and that user has to know what they’re building.

But this is the topic for a different post. :)

联系我们 contact @ memedata.com