AI - The Stock Market Hype and the Dangers of Sloppy Code

Ed Zitron challenges the narrative of an AI infrastructure boom, arguing that the industry relies on valuation rather than profitability and warning of a potential bubble similar to the dot-com era. The piece emphasizes that AI-generated code often contains hidden flaws, and that the notion of AI replacing software engineers is dangerous, as experienced engineers are still essential for maintaining code quality and security.

At this time, AI is still a business that largely survives on valuation rather than profitability. The narrative surrounding artificial intelligence is driven as much — if not more — by financial speculation as by technological progress. This makes the twin narrative of an “AI infrastructure boom” essential. Ed Zitron has become well known for challenging this story. In reality, such an infrastructure boom is difficult to sustain when the underlying economics remain deeply unprofitable. Now, let us take a moment to reflect on the danger of relying — for our businesses, and worse, for our civilization — on a bubble that could burst at any moment, much like the dot-com bubble. Entire industries are restructuring themselves around assumptions that may ultimately prove irrational, even disastrous. There is a dangerous idea circulating in the world, born from the union of greed and ignorance: that software engineers have become obsolete. We no longer need them Of course, someone who does not know how to write code cannot evaluate code quality. For such a person, any piece of code that works is just as good as any other piece of code that also works. They may see a functional demo and hastily conclude that AI can entirely replace software developers. An experienced engineer sees something different: brittle architecture, code with absurd or duplicated logic, security flaws, poor maintainability, and code that often collapses under real-world complexity. To the untrained eye, AI-generated code frequently looks convincing, while it may host invisible vectors of disaster. Hallucinations in software development are not harmless mistakes; they can become production bugs, security vulnerabilities, and eventually catastrophic business failures. The problem is not that AI writes code. The problem is that we seem to be heading toward an era in which we no longer fully understand the code powering our civilization. And because of that, we may eventually lose the ability to fix it manually if the systems that maintain it fail. Have you seen the movie “Idiocracy”? If not, you should. It might be a necessary or at least useful epiphany. All this does not mean AI is useless. Quite the opposite. AI is a productivity multiplier . It accelerates workflows, automates repetitive tasks, and helps experienced engineers move faster. AI will absolutely reduce certain kinds of tedious work and minimize human errors caused by repetition . It will likely eliminate some low-skill tasks and reshape the industry. But the idea that it removes the need for skilled engineers misunderstands both engineering and AI itself. AI may, but it should not replace competent software engineers. The absurdity of technological social trends cannot truly be countered in real time. Hype has its own momentum. Only time eventually separates genuine technological transformation from speculative mania and hysterical hype.