Take a moment and think about how much work you do each day. If you write code, how much time do you actually spend writing code around meetings, admin work, and other tasks. If you manage systems and develop scripts, how often do you get to work on a script, change it, upgrade it, or add a new feature? I bet it's a minority of time for most of you. Studies show that many developers spend only an hour or two writing code each day. I would guess it's lower for sysadmins or DBAs who incorporate coding into their jobs.

Now think about how much you enjoy each thing you do. I assume meetings aren't the most exciting thing you work on, nor is updating a document for others to read. When I wrote code as the main part of my job, solving the problem, trying different algorithms, experimenting with enhancements, those were the fun times.

Now imagine having a competent AI assistant that works with you. What if the AI does the coding and leaves you with the meetings and writing of specifications? It could happen. While it might be fun to direct a team of agents, you still need to understand software architecture and development, but you might not want to get away from writing code.

As more developers start to use AI agents to get work done, there is rising dissatisfaction among developers because the AI can do quite a bit of the coding, which is the thing that most developers love. The AI doesn't help with any of the other busy work, though AI agents might do a better job of ensuring docs match committed code (or released code).

What I'd really like is an AI that would take my place at meetings. Maybe do a report for me or take a summary back, get some action items for me. An AI agent could handle things that wouldn't necessarily be fun for me. Not all tedious things, but it could free up more time for coding.

However, that's not what the GenAI agents are being positioned to do. They're stealing the joyous part of development. At least, if managers have their way, that's the place they'll use GenAI most.