>...Is it irrational that this makes me a little anxious about job security over the longterm?
Noone knows what future holds, so some anxiety is just a fuel for adaptation.
For example, should Copilot take a widespread use, the number and scale of projects that will have to be maintained expands too. Moreover, making sense of the quilt patchwork of bits and pieces of code, I'd guess, written in many iterations/versions of Copilot's prowess is a very much a secure, if soul-killing, job for many. Not much different from what maintenance jobs are now. You're lucky when a project retains some clear overspanning architecture/style.
Anybody remembers the joys of GUI wizards, with tons of auto-generated code that "just works, just now"? Remember that desire to suggest a healthy rewrite? Well, now you could probably also promise that it would be an even quicker rewrite too!
But even then, the final responsibility for the code is on the programmer. One maybe could forge the code quicker, but code review is still supposed to be a human's job. Hopefully.
Noone knows what future holds, so some anxiety is just a fuel for adaptation.
For example, should Copilot take a widespread use, the number and scale of projects that will have to be maintained expands too. Moreover, making sense of the quilt patchwork of bits and pieces of code, I'd guess, written in many iterations/versions of Copilot's prowess is a very much a secure, if soul-killing, job for many. Not much different from what maintenance jobs are now. You're lucky when a project retains some clear overspanning architecture/style.
Anybody remembers the joys of GUI wizards, with tons of auto-generated code that "just works, just now"? Remember that desire to suggest a healthy rewrite? Well, now you could probably also promise that it would be an even quicker rewrite too!
But even then, the final responsibility for the code is on the programmer. One maybe could forge the code quicker, but code review is still supposed to be a human's job. Hopefully.