In 2024, 21% of all bachelor's degrees awarded were Computer Science from University of Maryland College Park.
It was 3% in 2011.
I don't agree with the article that AI is wrecking job prospects. I see it is as companies are just now trending towards running leaner vs hiring every good engineer available during ZIRP.
Nonetheless, it's gotta be tough out there for new grads.
Absolutely, and this trend didn't start with the current AI boom. It started getting tough for people around ~2017 (with some exceptions in between). Before that you could likely get a job right out of a boot camp. Supply now has far outweighed demand on the junior level.
I suspect it is also universities realizing that (pure) computer science has low demand so they shifted their program to either focus it on more industry-geared education, or dumb-dumbed the grade-inflation (data backs this up) enough the masses had the confidence to do it.
This could be the next iteration of stealing talent to prevent others from owning the market. An actually intelligent investor could dominate by bucking the trend and hire lots of smart, eager junior candidates.
When other tech companies realize GenAI will never produce what they want, there will be a rush to re-hire developers.
Top talent all started as junior talent. Grab that pool so nobody else will have it.
On a related note, we had another popular thread in HN earlier this week - (AWS CEO says using AI to replace junior staff is 'Dumbest thing I've ever heard' ) https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44972151 which is quite the opposite of this original post.
What's your argument supporting this? Ten years ago GenAI couldn't produce two coherent sentences. We've come a long way, what makes you think it won't go further?
That is what my company does except we basically hire out of high school. After the founders, 100% of our employees (including myself) were hired directly as high school interns, kept for years during college, and got offers after graduation.
I wrote about this a bit. I wish we could hire more. I am kind of shocked how few companies do it. There are a LOT of smart kids who would love a summer programming job.
The issue with hiring many juniors is, when there is another dev boom, all the juniors that were hired, now mids or seniors, are going to jump ship to whoever is going to pay them the most.
So, the company can either grow talent and then pay them market rate or hire at market rates from other companies that grew them. Hiring juniors, while good for the industry in the long run, doesn't really benefit an individual company.
It is game theory and it is still why senior developers make a lot of money despite there being an oversupply of juniors.
Also, a lot of companies are not attractive enough for seniors (low job security/ not good environment/ not exciting work/ etc), so they are forced to hire juniors
> This could be the next iteration of stealing talent to prevent others from owning the market. An actually intelligent investor could dominate by bucking the trend and hire lots of smart, eager junior candidates.
First, they'd have to identify them, which the interview process at most companies is terrible at.
How much of the glut of new compsci/sweng young people is the result of real market demands, vs social media personalities creating the appearance of a demand?
My observation is that, between 2019 and 2023, there were many creators shilling this, and probably quite good livings made off views and clicks. Could social media have amplified this, “fakely”?
How many people are just assuming the study is true or false based on what you already think is the case?
Better instead to use our collective brain power for something more productive. Such as digging into the various possible causal factors and understanding if the paper properly addresses and disentangles them.
The paper tries to directly address this by showing that job market for young software devs is much worse than other occupations that aren't as affected by AI. If it was broad economic decline or fear, you'd expect to it affect job types more broadly.
Perhaps you have it backwards, and the future is gloomy because AI is wrecking young american's job prospects.
Is it possible to stay better than AI? Maybe for some people. Not for the average person. The results of that are one of the largest contributors to the gloomy future (among other things).
Especially given how the gov stats for unemployment rate and CPI have been changed over the years.
Example, if you dig into who we technically consider unemployed in that number, you’ll laugh.
Let’s say after 6 months of emails and ghost listings you take a break, you’re now considered “not in the labor force” which is the same category as retirees and full-time students. So that “improves” the unemployment rate
Not a hot take, but I think we’ve been in a recession/massive slowdown for much longer than the gov data shows
Willing to bet hedge funds have their own calculations of these metrics they keep secret as a market edge
That would be worth considering as a factor, but you wouldn't expect it to so disproportionately affect young workers. Also, they are showing the same trend with receptionists, translators and customer service representatives which wouldn't have had the tax effect.
"While anecdotal evidence has emerged showing AI's effects on certain professions, such as software coding, there has been little harder evidence that the technology was significantly weighing on the labor market."
Anecdotal evidence accompanied by repeated wild speculation about _other_ occupations, including ones with educational and certification requirements
"The Stanford economists first looked at areas where AI can automate many of the tasks workers perform, and therefore potentially replace them. Those include jobs such as software developers, receptionists, translators and customer service representatives."
Generally, none of those require professional certification or even a college degree; they are "unregulated"
"Head counts among customer service representatives a category that, unlike software development, generally doesn't require a college education followed a similar pattern."
The author assumes that software development requires a college degree
NB. Even if it is common to have one this is not the same as a legal requirement
AI has also introduced an extra cost for the self employed, in the form of ai fee charged for AI optimisation "GAIO",on top of seo fee's on top of hosting and development costs, which can easily be more than 5% of gross for a small business starting out.
> While we find employment declines for young workers
in occupations where AI primarily automates work, we find employment growth in occupations
in which AI use is most augmentative.
Maybe there is some hope if they can't fully automate the job with AI.
Readit News
In 2024, 21% of all bachelor's degrees awarded were Computer Science from University of Maryland College Park.
It was 3% in 2011.
I don't agree with the article that AI is wrecking job prospects. I see it is as companies are just now trending towards running leaner vs hiring every good engineer available during ZIRP.
Nonetheless, it's gotta be tough out there for new grads.
https://www.usmd.edu/IRIS/DataJournal/Degrees/?report=Degree...
The current phrasing makes it sound like they’re a diploma mill producing 21% of all bachelor degrees in the country.
Deleted Comment
This sounds more like overproduction of entry-level computer scientists than anything AI or hiring managers are up to.
I really believe it's just for the headlines.
Dead Comment
When other tech companies realize GenAI will never produce what they want, there will be a rush to re-hire developers.
Top talent all started as junior talent. Grab that pool so nobody else will have it.
What's your argument supporting this? Ten years ago GenAI couldn't produce two coherent sentences. We've come a long way, what makes you think it won't go further?
Depending on the question, it still can't.
It's kinda crazy how you view repeating probabilistic outputs as "coherent sentences".
> We've come a long way, what makes you think it won't go further?
Where did I say it won't go further? I said it will never produce what they want.
Those are different things.
Regardless, you're focused on the wrong point.
I wrote about this a bit. I wish we could hire more. I am kind of shocked how few companies do it. There are a LOT of smart kids who would love a summer programming job.
https://simonsarris.com/p/growing-software-developers
Yeah, that's the point!
> So, the company can either grow talent and then pay them market rate or hire at market rates from other companies that grew them.
It's not a zero sum game. The simple fact you overlooked is not every junior jumps ship.
> Hiring juniors, while good for the industry in the long run, doesn't really benefit an individual company
Things that are good for the industry DO benefit individual companies. Having a large and capable talent pool is good for everyone.
If this is really a concern, require a long-term employment contract from incoming candidates.
First, they'd have to identify them, which the interview process at most companies is terrible at.
Deleted Comment
My observation is that, between 2019 and 2023, there were many creators shilling this, and probably quite good livings made off views and clicks. Could social media have amplified this, “fakely”?
https://digitaleconomy.stanford.edu/wp-content/uploads/2025/...
Better instead to use our collective brain power for something more productive. Such as digging into the various possible causal factors and understanding if the paper properly addresses and disentangles them.
But it makes it much nicer to say its AI that's stealing jobs to create even more hype.
Is it possible to stay better than AI? Maybe for some people. Not for the average person. The results of that are one of the largest contributors to the gloomy future (among other things).
Example, if you dig into who we technically consider unemployed in that number, you’ll laugh.
Let’s say after 6 months of emails and ghost listings you take a break, you’re now considered “not in the labor force” which is the same category as retirees and full-time students. So that “improves” the unemployment rate
Not a hot take, but I think we’ve been in a recession/massive slowdown for much longer than the gov data shows
Willing to bet hedge funds have their own calculations of these metrics they keep secret as a market edge
Previously discussed: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44226145
Anecdotal evidence accompanied by repeated wild speculation about _other_ occupations, including ones with educational and certification requirements
"The Stanford economists first looked at areas where AI can automate many of the tasks workers perform, and therefore potentially replace them. Those include jobs such as software developers, receptionists, translators and customer service representatives."
Generally, none of those require professional certification or even a college degree; they are "unregulated"
https://www.state.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/Guidance-on...
"Head counts among customer service representatives a category that, unlike software development, generally doesn't require a college education followed a similar pattern."
The author assumes that software development requires a college degree
NB. Even if it is common to have one this is not the same as a legal requirement
https://www.nocsdegree.com/blog/companies-that-hire-programm...
Maybe there is some hope if they can't fully automate the job with AI.