An anonymous reader shared this report from the New York Times: Between the time [construction worker Florencio] Rendon applied for the coding boot camp and the time he graduated, what Mr. Rendon imagined as a "golden ticket" to a better life had expired. About 135,000 start-up and tech industry workers were laid off from their jobs, according to one count. At the same time, new artificial intelligence tools like ChatGPT, an online chatbot from OpenAI, which could be used as coding assistants, were quickly becoming mainstream, and the outlook for coding jobs was shifting. Mr. Rendon says he didn't land a single interview.

Coding boot camp graduates across the country are facing a similarly tough job market. In Philadelphia, Mal Durham, a lawyer who wanted to change careers, was about halfway through a part-time coding boot camp late last year when its organizers with the nonprofit Launchcode delivered disappointing news. "They said: 'Here is what the hiring metrics look like. Things are down. The number of opportunities is down,'" she said. "It was really disconcerting." In Boston, Dan Pickett, the founder of a boot camp called Launch Academy, decided in May to pause his courses indefinitely because his job placement rates, once as high as 90 percent, had dwindled to below 60 percent. "I loved what we were doing," he said. "We served the market. We changed a lot of lives. The team didn't want that to turn sour."

Compared with five years ago, the number of active job postings for software developers has dropped 56 percent, according to data compiled by CompTIA. For inexperienced developers, the plunge is an even worse 67 percent. "I would say this is the worst environment for entry-level jobs in tech, period, that I've seen in 25 years," said Venky Ganesan, a partner at the venture capital firm Menlo Ventures.
A Stack Overflow survey of 65,000 developers found that 60% had used AI coding tools this year, the article points out. And it includes two predictions about the future:

• Armando Solar-Lezama, leader of MIT's Computer-Assisted Programming Group, "believes that A.I. tools are good news for programming careers. If coding becomes easier, he argues, we'll just make more, better software. We'll use it to solve problems that wouldn't have been worth the hassle previously, and standards will skyrocket."

• Zach Sims, a co-founder of Codecademy, said of the job prospects for coding boot camp graduates" "I think it's pretty grim."

Back in the mid-1980s Mark Roth was in 5th grade when the game ChipWits "helped kindle his interest in coding," according to an online biography. ("By middle school, he wrote his first Commodore 64 assembler and by high school he authored a 3D Graphics library for DOS.")

And 40 years later, Slashdot reader markroth8 writes that the programming puzzle/logic game "inspired many people to become professional coders": ChipWits was first released for Mac in 1984, and was later ported to Commodore 64 and Apple II in 1985. To celebrate the game's 40th anniversary, the team behind the new Steam reboot of ChipWits (including its original co-creator Doug Sharp, also of fame for the game King of Chicago) is announcing the recovery and open source release of the original game's source code, written in the FORTH programming language, for both Mac and Commodore 64 platforms.

Recovering data from 40-year old 5.25" and 3.5" disks was a challenge in and of itself, and most of the data survived unscathed! It's interesting to read the 40-year-old code, and compare it to modern game development.
"Our goal for open sourcing the original version of ChipWits is to ensure its legacy lives on," according to the announcement. (It adds that "We also wanted to share an appreciation for what cross-platform software development for 8-bit microcomputers was like in 1984.")

The Rust community has "recognized the unsafety of Rust (if used incorrectly)," according to a blog post by Amazon Web Services.

So now AWS and the Rust Foundation are "crowdsourcing an effort to verify the Rust standard library," according to an article at DevClass.com, "by setting out a series of challenges for devs and offering financial rewards for solutions..." Rust includes ways to bypass its safety guarantees though, with the use of the "unsafe" keyword... The issue AWS highlights is that even if developers use only safe code, most applications still depend on the Rust standard library. AWS states that there are approximately 7.5K unsafe functions in the Rust Standard Library and notes that 57 "soundness issues" and 20 CVEs (Common Vulnerabilities and Exposures) have been reported in the last three years. [28% of the soundness issues were discovered in 2024.]

Marking a function as unsafe does not mean it is vulnerable, only that Rust does not guarantee its safety. AWS plans to reduce the risk by using tools and techniques for formal verification of key library code, but believes that "a single team would be unable to make significant inroads" for reasons including the lack of a verification mechanism in the Rust ecosystem and what it calls the "unknowns of scalable verification." The plan therefore is to turn this over to the community, by posing challenges and rewarding developers for solutions.... A GitHub repository provides a fork of the Rust code and includes a set of challenges, currently 13 of them... The Rust Foundation says that there is a financial reward tied to each challenge, and that the "challenge rewards committee is responsible for reviewing activity and dispensing rewards." How much will be paid though is not stated.

Despite the wide admiration for Rust, there is no formal specification for the language, an issue which impacts formal verification efforts.
Thanks to Slashdot reader sean-it-all for sharing the news.

Microsoft-owned GitHub published a blog post asking "Does GitHub Copilot improve code quality? Here's what the data says."

Its first paragraph includes statistics from past studies — that GitHub Copilot has helped developers code up to 55% faster, leaving 88% of developers feeling more "in the flow" and 85% feeling more confident in their code.

But does it improve code quality? [W]e recruited 202 [Python] developers with at least five years of experience. Half were randomly assigned GitHub Copilot access and the other half were instructed not to use any AI tools... We then evaluated the code with unit tests and with an expert review conducted by developers.

Our findings overall show that code authored with GitHub Copilot has increased functionality and improved readability, is of better quality, and receives higher approval rates... Developers with GitHub Copilot access had a 56% greater likelihood of passing all 10 unit tests in the study, indicating that GitHub Copilot helps developers write more functional code by a wide margin. In blind reviews, code written with GitHub Copilot had significantly fewer code readability errors, allowing developers to write 13.6% more lines of code, on average, without encountering readability problems. Readability improved by 3.62%, reliability by 2.94%, maintainability by 2.47%, and conciseness by 4.16%. All numbers were statistically significant... Developers were 5% more likely to approve code written with GitHub Copilot, meaning that such code is ready to be merged sooner, speeding up the time to fix bugs or deploy new features.
"While GitHub's reports have been positive, a few others haven't," reports Visual Studio magazine: For example, a recent study from Uplevel Data Labs said, "Developers with Copilot access saw a significantly higher bug rate while their issue throughput remained consistent."

And earlier this year a "Coding on Copilot" whitepaper from GitClear said, "We find disconcerting trends for maintainability. Code churn — the percentage of lines that are reverted or updated less than two weeks after being authored — is projected to double in 2024 compared to its 2021, pre-AI baseline. We further find that the percentage of 'added code' and 'copy/pasted code' is increasing in proportion to 'updated,' 'deleted,' and 'moved 'code. In this regard, AI-generated code resembles an itinerant contributor, prone to violate the DRY-ness [don't repeat yourself] of the repos visited."

Longtime Slashdot reader theodp writes: Past corporate-sponsored Hour of Code tutorials for the nation's schoolchildren have blurred the lines between coding lessons and product infomercials. So too is the case again with this year's newly-announced Hour of Code 2024 flagship tutorials, which include Microsoft Minecraft, Amazon Music, and Transformers One movie-themed intros to coding. The press release announcing the tutorials from tech-backed nonprofit Code.org, which organizes the Hour of Code and counts Microsoft and Amazon as $30+ million donors, boasts of its "decade of partnership with [Microsoft] Minecraft this year, reaching more than 300 million sessions of Minecraft Hour of Code since 2015!"

Interestingly, The Transformers (Paramount Pictures, which released Transformers One in the U.S., is a $25,000+ Code.org donor) is cited as one of the OG's of children's Saturday morning cartoon advertising (aka 30-minute commercials) that prompted the Children's Television Act (CTA) of 1990, an act of Congress that ordered the FCC to put in place regulations to protect children from advertising. Throughout the 1980s, Action for Children's Television (ACT) criticized children's television programs that "blur(red) the distinction between program content and commercial speech."

TV Time's parent company criticized Apple's App Store control after the tech giant removed its streaming app over an intellectual property dispute. "Apple holds significant power over app developers by controlling access to a massive market and, in this case, seems to have acted on a complaint without requiring robust evidence from the complainant," Jerry Inman, CMO of Whip Media, which operates the app, told TechCrunch.

The app was pulled from the store by Apple after the developer refused to pay a settlement fee related to user-uploaded cover art. The app has since been reinstated.

Slashdot readers damn_registrars and GFS666 share the news of the passing of Thomas E. Kurtz, co-inventor of the BASIC programming language back in the 1960s. He was 96. Hackaday reports: The origins of BASIC lie in the Dartmouth Timesharing System, like similar timesharing operating systems of the day, designed to allow the resources of a single computer to be shared across many terminals. In this case the computer was at Dartmouth College, and BASIC was designed to be a language with which software could be written by average students who perhaps didn't have a computing background. In the decade that followed it proved ideal for the new microcomputers, and few were the home computers of the era which didn't boot into some form of BASIC interpreter. Kurtz continued his work as a distinguished academic and educator until his retirement in 1993, but throughout he remained as the guiding hand of the language.

The goal? "Make C++ and Rust interoperability easily accessible and approachable to the widest possible audience." And the Rust Foundation's "Interop Initiative" is specifically focused on the goal of interoperability "within the same executable," through either inline embedding that allows "integrated compilation", or foreign function interfaces.

To that end, a statement addressing "the challenges and opportunities in C++ and Rust interoperability" was announced this week by the Rust Foundation. Pointing out that the "Interop Initiative" was launched in February 2024 with a $1M contribution from Google, it now "proposes a collaborative, problem-space approach engaging key stakeholders from both language communities.

"Rather than prescribing specific solutions, this problem statement serves as a foundation for community input and participation in shaping both the strategic direction and tactical implementation of improved C++/Rust interoperability."

Their official problem statement outlines three "key strategic approaches."

- Improve existing tools and address tactical issues to reduce interoperability friction and risk in the short term.

- Build consensus around long-term goals requiring changes to Rust itself and develop the tactical approaches to begin pursuing them.

- Engage with the C++ community and committee to improve the quality of interoperation for both languages to help realize the mutual goals of safety and performance.

And it argues that interoperability "is essential to pursuing safety and performance which is maintainable and scalable." A significant amount of development has gone into libraries to facilitate interoperability with both C and C++, but from the language and compiler level, the situation remains largely unchanged from the early days of Rust. As the desire to integrate Rust into more C++ codebases increases, the value of making C++/Rust interoperability safer, easier, and more efficient is rapidly increasing. While each language takes a different overall approach, both view safety as an essential concern in modern systems. Both Rust and C++ have language- and standard-library-level facilities to improve safety in seemingly compatible ways, but significant benefits are lost when transiting the foreign function interfaces (FFI) boundary using the C ABI...

The consequence of this increased cost to interoperate means both C++ and Rust codebases are less able to access valuable code that already exists in the other language, and the ability to transition system components from one language to another is reduced outside of existing C-like interface boundaries. Ultimately, this reduction in freedom leads to worse outcomes for all users since technologists are less free to choose the most effective solutions.

The Tiobe index tries to track the popularity of programming languages by counting the number of search results for the language's name followed by the word "programming" (on 25 different search engines). And this month there were some surprises...

By TIOBE's reckoning, compared to a year ago PHP has now fallen from #7 to #12, while Delphi/Object Pascal shot up five spots from #16 to #11. In that same year, Fortran jumped from #12 to #8 — while both Visual Basic and SQL dropped down a single rank. Toward the top of the list, C actually fell from the #2 spot over the last 12 months to the #4 spot.

And Go just reached the #7 rank on the TIOBE's ranking of programming language popularity — "an all time high for Go," according to TIOBE CEO Paul Jansen. In this month's note, he explains what he thinks is unusual about this — starting by saying that Go programs are both fast, and easy in many ways — easy to deploy, easy to learn, and easy to understand. Python for instance is easy to learn but not fast, and deployment for larger Python programs is fragile due to dependencies on all kind of versioned libraries in the environment.

If compared to Rust for instance (another contender for a top position), Go is a tiny bit slower, but the Go programs are much easier to understand. The next hurdle for Go in the TIOBE index is JavaScript at position #6. That will be a tough one to pass. JavaScript is ubiquitous in software development, although for larger JavaScript systems we see a shift to TypeScript nowadays.
"If annual trends continue this way, Go will bypass JavaScript within 3 years," TIOBE's CEO predicts. (Adding "Let's see what the future has in store for Go...") Although the Go team actually has specific plans for the future, according to a blog post this week celebrating Go's 15th anniversary: We're working on making Go better for AI — and AI better for Go — by enhancing Go's capabilities in AI infrastructure, applications, and developer assistance. Go is a great language for building production systems, and we want it to be a great language for building production AI systems, too... For AI applications, we will continue building out first-class support for Go in popular AI SDKs, including LangChainGo and Genkit. And from its very beginning, Go aimed to improve the end-to-end software engineering process, so naturally we're looking at bringing the latest tools and techniques from AI to bear on reducing developer toil, leaving more time for the fun stuff — like actually programming!
TIOBE's top 10 programming language rankings for the month of November:

1. Python
2. C++
3. Java
4. C
5. C#
6. JavaScript
7. Go
8. Fortran
9. Visual Basic
10. SQL

Google's transistion to Safe Coding and memory-safe languages "will take multiple years," according to a post on Google's security blog. So "we're also retrofitting secure-by-design principles to our existing C++ codebase wherever possible," a process which includes "working towards bringing spatial memory safety into as many of our C++ codebases as possible, including Chrome and the monolithic codebase powering our services." We've begun by enabling hardened libc++, which adds bounds checking to standard C++ data structures, eliminating a significant class of spatial safety bugs. While C++ will not become fully memory-safe, these improvements reduce risk as discussed in more detail in our perspective on memory safety, leading to more reliable and secure software... It's also worth noting that similar hardening is available in other C++ standard libraries, such as libstdc++. Building on the successful deployment of hardened libc++ in Chrome in 2022, we've now made it default across our server-side production systems. This improves spatial memory safety across our services, including key performance-critical components of products like Search, Gmail, Drive, YouTube, and Maps... The performance impact of these changes was surprisingly low, despite Google's modern C++ codebase making heavy use of libc++. Hardening libc++ resulted in an average 0.30% performance impact across our services (yes, only a third of a percent) ...

In just a few months since enabling hardened libc++ by default, we've already seen benefits. Hardened libc++ has already disrupted an internal red team exercise and would have prevented another one that happened before we enabled hardening, demonstrating its effectiveness in thwarting exploits. The safety checks have uncovered over 1,000 bugs, and would prevent 1,000 to 2,000 new bugs yearly at our current rate of C++ development...

The process of identifying and fixing bugs uncovered by hardened libc++ led to a 30% reduction in our baseline segmentation fault rate across production, indicating improved code reliability and quality. Beyond crashes, the checks also caught errors that would have otherwise manifested as unpredictable behavior or data corruption... Hardened libc++ enabled us to identify and fix multiple bugs that had been lurking in our code for more than a decade. The checks transform many difficult-to-diagnose memory corruptions into immediate and easily debuggable errors, saving developers valuable time and effort.
The post notes that they're also working on "making it easier to interoperate with memory-safe languages. Migrating our C++ to Safe Buffers shrinks the gap between the languages, which simplifies interoperability and potentially even an eventual automated translation."

Longtime Slashdot reader DaPhil writes: I taught myself to code at 12 years old in the 90s and I've always liked the back-and-forth with the runtime to achieve the right result. I recently got back from other roles to code again, and when starting a new project last year, I decided to give the new "AI assistants" a go.

My initial surprise at the quality and the speed you can achieve when using ChatGPT and/or Copilot when coding turned sour over the months, as I realized that all the joy I felt about trying to get the result I want -- slowly improving my code by (slowly) thinking, checking the results against the runtime, and finally achieving success -- is, well, gone. What I do now is type English sentences in increasingly desperate attempts to get ChatGPT to output what I want (or provide snippets to Copilot to get the right autocompletion), which -- as they are pretty much black boxes -- is frustrating and non-linear: it either "just works," or it doesn't. There is no measure of progress. In a way, having Copilot in the IDE was even worse, since it often disrupts my thinking when suggesting completions.

I've since disabled Copilot. Interestingly, I myself now feel somehow "disabled" without it in the IDE; however, the abstention has given me back the ability to sit back and think, and through that, the joy of programming. Still, it feels like I'm now somehow an ex-drug addict always on the verge of a relapse. I was wondering if any of you felt the same, or if I'm just... old.

Phoronix's Michael Larabel reports: The OpenMP Architecture Review Board announced from SC24 that OpenMP 6.0 is now available as a major upgrade to the OpenMP specification for multi-process programming within C / C++ / Fortran. A big emphasis on OpenMP 6.0 is making it easier for developers to embrace. OpenMP 6.0 aims to make it easier to support parallel programming in new applications, easier to adapt to new use-cases, and more fine-grained developer control.

OpenMP 6.0 simplifies task programming with support for task execution by free-agent threads, allowing for recording of task graphs for efficient replay, and other improvements. OpenMP 6.0 also brings support for array syntax applications, better control over memory allocations and accessibility, easier writing of asynchronous data transfers, and other improvements for enhanced device support / offloading. There is also easier programming of loop transformations, support for induction, support for C23 / Fortran 2023 / C++23, grater user control of storage resources and memory spaces, and other improvements.

Mark Rainey: Engineers are currently debugging why the Voyager 1 spacecraft, which is 15 billions miles away, turned off its main radio and switched to a backup radio that hasn't been used in over forty years!

I've had some tricky debugging issues in the past, including finding compiler bugs and debugging code with no debugger that had been burnt into prom packs for terminals, however I have huge admiration for the engineers maintaining the operation of Voyager 1.

Recently they sent a command to the craft that caused it to shut off its main radio transmitter, seemingly in an effort to preserve power and protect from faults. This prompted it to switch over to the backup radio transmitter, that is lower power. Now they have regained communication they are trying to determine the cause on hardware that is nearly 50 years old. Any communication takes days. When you think you have a difficult issue to debug, spare a thought for this team.

Paul Kinlan, who leads the Chrome and the Open Web Developer Relations team at Google, asks and answers the question (with a no.): Frameworks are abstractions over a platform designed for people and teams to accelerate their teams new work and maintenance while improving the consistency and quality of the projects. They also frequently force a certain type of structure and architecture to your code base. This isn't a bad thing, team productivity is an important aspect of any software.

I'm of the belief that software development is entering a radical shift that is currently driven by agents like Replit's and there is a world where a person never actually has to manipulate code directly anymore. As I was making broad and sweeping changes to the functionality of the applications by throwing the Agent a couple of prompts here and there, the software didn't seem to care that there was repetition in the code across multiple views, it didn't care about shared logic, extensibility or inheritability of components... it just implemented what it needed to do and it did it as vanilla as it could.

I was just left wondering if there will be a need for frameworks in the future? Do the architecture patterns we've learnt over the years matter? Will new patterns for software architecture appear that favour LLM management?

Google's head of research Yossi Matias maintains that learning to code remains "as important as ever" despite AI's growing role in software development. While AI tools have reduced coding time for some developers -- and Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai noting that AI now generates a quarter of all code, Matias stressed that human engineers still review and approve AI-generated code.

The Google executive, who also serves as a company VP, acknowledged that junior professionals have faced challenges gaining experience as AI handles entry-level tasks. Google has launched initiatives to support early-career employees through this transition. Matias compared coding literacy to basic mathematics, arguing it provides crucial understanding of technology regardless of career path.

"Java application security would be enhanced through two proposals aimed at resisting quantum computing attacks," reports InfoWorld, "one plan involving digital signatures and the other key encapsulation." The two proposals reside in the OpenJDK JEP (JDK Enhancement Proposal) index.

The Quantum-Resistant Module-Lattice-Based Digital Signature Algorithm proposal calls for enhancing the security of Java applications by providing an implementation of the quantum-resistant module-latticed-based digital signature algorithm (ML-DSA). ML-DSA would secure against future quantum computing attacks by using digital signatures to detect unauthorized modifications to data and to authenticate the identity of signatories. ML-DSA was standardized by the United States National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) in FIPS 204.

The Quantum-Resistant Module-Lattice-Based Key Encapsulation Mechanism proposal calls for enhancing application security by providing an implementation of the quantum-resistant module-lattice-based key encapsulation mechanism (ML-KEM). KEMs are used to secure symmetric keys over insecure communication channels using public key cryptography. ML-KEM is designed to be secure against future quantum computing attacks and was standardized by NIST in FIPS 203.

Nathan Sobo "joined GitHub in late 2011 to build the Atom text editor," according to an online biography, "and he led the Atom team until 2018." Max Brunsfeld joined the Atom team in 2013, and "While driving Atom towards its 1.0 launch during the day, Max spent nights and weekends building Tree-sitter, a blazing-fast and expressive incremental parsing framework that currently powers all code analysis at GitHub."

Last year they teamed up with Antonio Scandurra (another Atom alumnus) to launch a new startup called Zed (which in 2023 raised $10 million, according to TechCrunch). And today the open source blog It's FOSS checks in on their open-source code editor — "Zed Editor". Mainly written in Rust, it supports running in CLI, diagnosing project-wide errors, split panes, and markdown previews: By default, any added content is treated as plain text. I used the language switcher to change it to Rust so that I would get proper syntax highlighting, indentation, error detection, and other useful language-specific functions. The switch highlighted all the Rust elements correctly, and I then focused on Zed Editor's user interface. The overall feel of the editor was minimal, with all the important options being laid out nicely.

[Its status bar] had some interesting panels. The first one I checked was the Terminal Panel, which, as the name suggests, lets you run commands, scripts, and facilitates interaction with system files or processes directly from within the editor. I then moved to the Assistant Panel, which is home to various large language models that can be integrated into Zed Editor. There are options like Anthropic, GitHub Copilot Chat, Ollama, OpenAI, and Google AI... The Zed Editor team has also recently introduced Zed AI in collaboration with Anthropic for assisting with coding, allowing for code generation, advanced context-powered interactions, and more...

The real-time collaboration features on Zed Editor are quite appealing too. To check them out, I had to log in with my GitHub account. After logging in, the Collab Panel opened up, and I could see many channels from the official Zed community. I could chat with others, add collaborators to existing projects, join a call with the option to share my screen and track other collaborators' cursors, add new contacts, and carry out many other collaborative tasks.

One can also use extensions and themes to extend what Zed Editor can do. There are some nice pre-installed themes as well.

"The Rust trademark policy has been updated and a new draft is available to view," announced the Rust Foundation this week.

The last proposed trademark policy (in April of 2023) was criticized by open source advocate Bruce Perens in The Register as "far awry of fair use which is legally permitted." The Rust Foundation says this new version has "incorporated a number of suggestions from the Rust community," in a blog post that summarizes the feedback and enumerates specific ways it's been addressed: 1. We primarily plan to lean on community reports for enforcement and have no intention of spending our limited resources policing the work of small creators.

2. We have removed the non-legal language summary and instead have clarified wording throughout as best we can while keeping the policy valid.

3. The Rust trademark does not cover use of the word "Rust" in general and instead pertains to its use in relevant technical settings.

4. We have updated the logo usage policy. Color modifications are allowed.

5. The non-endorsement rule is about managing perception of official affiliation with the Foundation and Rust Project, and is thus subjective.

6. We removed restrictions on the use of "Rust" and "Cargo" in package names. The crates prefixes "rust-" and "cargo-" are no longer reserved to the Rust Project.

7. We will usually allow the community to use the marks on limited merchandise (more details in the updated draft)....

[T]he central purpose of these updates is to empower all Rustaceans to engage with the Rust language ecosystem more confidently. As a final step in this process, we invite you to review the updated policy and share any blocking concerns you might have... Thank you to everyone who weighed in with helpful suggestions on the initial trademark policy draft we shared. The level of engagement and passion within the Rust community is inspiring to all of us at the Rust Foundation.
The tech news site Heise Online writes "It is noticeable that the language is much clearer and dispenses with a lot of legal jargon," in a piece which argues the new draft "should calm the waves and create clarity." The new draft is not only formulated more simply, but is also significantly shorter. Some restrictions have been softened in the new rules or have disappeared completely...

Meanwhile, the Foundation has also adapted its logo so that it is clear which logo stands for the programming language and which for the Foundation. The use of the name Rust is explicitly permitted to identify projects that are either written in the programming language or are compatible with it...

Before the new trademark rules come into force, the Rust Foundation is collecting feedback on the current draft. The web form is open until November 20, 2024.

An anonymous reader quotes a report from Oregon Live: Intel told employees this week that it will bring back free coffee and tea at its work sites, one of many benefits the chipmaker eliminated last summer as it sought to slash $10 billion from its annual budget. "Although Intel still faces cost challenges, we understand that small comforts play a significant role in our daily routines," Intel wrote on its internal messaging forum, called Circuit. "We know this is a small step, but we hope it is a meaningful one in supporting our workplace culture." Intel declined comment. The company did not resume offering free fruit, another perk eliminated last summer. Employees say privately that morale has been devastated by Intel's poor financial performance and by cutbacks aimed at returning the business to profitability.

[...] Christy Pambianchi, Intel's chief people officer, told employees that Intel had been spending $100 million annually on free and discounted food and beverages and couldn't afford to keep doing that. "Until we get into a better financial health position, we need to be suspending those," Pambianchi said, according to an account of the meeting reviewed by The Oregonian/OregonLive. By Wednesday the company had reversed itself, committing to keep its employees caffeinated. In August, Intel announced plans to lay off over 16,000 employees, representing more than 15% of its global workforce. Its stock dropped to a 50-year low following the announcement. Starting November 8, Nvidia will replace the chipmaker on the Dow Jones Industrial Average.

I had the opportunity to interview esteemed programmer Steve Yegge for the SourceForge Podcast to ask him all about AI-powered coding assistants and the future of programming. "We're moving from where you have to write the code to where the LLM will write the code and you're just having a conversation with it about the code," said Yegge. "That is much more accessible to people who are just getting into the industry."

Steve has nearly 30 years of programming experience working at Geoworks, Amazon, Google, Grab and now SourceGraph, working to build out the Cody AI assistant platform. Here's his Wikipedia page. He's not shy about sharing his opinions or predictions for the industry, no matter how difficult it may be for some to hear. "I'm going to make the claim that ... line-oriented programming, which we've done for the last 40, 50 years, ... is going away. It is dying just like assembly language did, and it will be completely dead within five years."

You can watch the episode on YouTube and stream on all major podcast platforms. A transcription of the podcast is available here.