Kunal .’s Post

AI didn't replace the best developers. It made the gap between them and everyone else even wider. Read a Josh Comeau newsletter piece(https://lnkd.in/g264A2Ak) that made me stop and think. Matt Perry — the engineer behind Framer Motion, one of the most technically sophisticated animation libraries in the JS ecosystem — set a goal to close 60 GitHub issues in Q1 2026. He closed 160. A major refactor he expected to take weeks? Done in a single January afternoon. But here's what we keep getting wrong: we look at that result and credit the AI. The actual story is the opposite. Meanwhile on r/vibecoding, non-technical users are hitting walls after 3-hour prompting sessions, unable to debug a bug that took 30 seconds to fix once they just opened the file. Same tools. Completely different outcomes. A few things that clicked for me after reading this: Deep expertise isn't obsolete — it's now the ceiling for how far your AI usage can scale LLMs compound your existing knowledge; they don't replace the foundation beneath it The "AI will replace devs" narrative only holds if you assume everyone uses it equally well — they don't The biggest risk isn't AI taking your job. It's staying surface-level while others go deeper. We keep selling the sneakers when the real product is the player wearing them. For backend devs and GenAI engineers specifically — the folks building the infra that powers these tools — this framing matters a lot right now. What's your honest take: is going deep on fundamentals still worth it in 2026, or are we rationalizing our way through an uncomfortable transition? #GenAI #BackendDevelopment #LLMEngineering #AIEngineering #SoftwareEngineering #FutureOfWork #TechNews #AI #MachineLearning #Coding #CareerInTech #TechCommunityIndia #DeveloperGrowth #JobSearchTips #AITools #VibeCoding #TechLayoffs #IndianDeveloper #LearnToCode #ProgrammerLife

To view or add a comment, sign in

Explore content categories