this post was submitted on 12 Jan 2026
86 points (97.8% liked)

Programming

24365 readers
453 users here now

Welcome to the main community in programming.dev! Feel free to post anything relating to programming here!

Cross posting is strongly encouraged in the instance. If you feel your post or another person's post makes sense in another community cross post into it.

Hope you enjoy the instance!

Rules

Rules

  • Follow the programming.dev instance rules
  • Keep content related to programming in some way
  • If you're posting long videos try to add in some form of tldr for those who don't want to watch videos

Wormhole

Follow the wormhole through a path of communities !webdev@programming.dev



founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] codeinabox@programming.dev 9 points 5 hours ago (1 children)

This article is quite interesting! There are a few standout quotes for me:

On one hand, we are witnessing the true democratisation of software creation. The barrier to entry has effectively collapsed. For the first time, non-developers aren’t just consumers of software - they are the architects of their own tools.

The democratisation effect is something I've been thinking about myself, as hiring developers or learning to code doesn't come cheap. However, if it allows non-profits to build ideas that can make our world a better place, then that is a good thing.

We’re entering a new era of software development where the goal isn't always longevity. For years, the industry has been obsessed with building "platforms" and "ecosystems," but the tide is shifting toward something more ephemeral. We're moving from SaaS to scratchpads.

A lot of this new software isn't meant to live forever. In fact, it’s the opposite. People are increasingly building tools to solve a single, specific problem exactly once—and then discarding them. It is software as a disposable utility, designed for the immediate "now" rather than the distant "later."

I've not thought about it in this way but this is a really good point. When you make code cheap, it makes it easier to create bespoke short-lived solutions.

The real cost of software isn’t the initial write; it’s the maintenance, the edge cases, the mounting UX debt, and the complexities of data ownership. These "fast" solutions are brittle.

Though, as much as these tools might democratise software development, they still require engineering expertise to be sustainable.

[–] ICastFist@programming.dev 11 points 3 hours ago

The democratisation effect is something I’ve been thinking about myself, as hiring developers or learning to code doesn’t come cheap.

It's not really "democratizing" anything, since anything made that isn't like a simple calendar or forum will come with more bugs than working features. Low and no-code development options have been available for ages, so "doesn't know how to code" was never an actual barrier to making software. Not only that, learning to code could be done effectively for free for well over 15 years now, online resources have only gotten better. It was never about the (lack of) money, it was always about time needed. "I don't want to/can't learn this, yet I want the thing done" - that's why we pay professionals.

However, if it allows non-profits to build ideas that can make our world a better place, then that is a good thing.

At best, they'll get semi-working prototypes. At worst, they'll try to sell said prototypes as end products. Besides, anything that is "a disposable utility, designed for the immediate “now” rather than the distant “later.”" is extremely unlikely to make the world a better place.