There aren’t many professions without a stereotype attached, and programming is sure among them. But are these ideas about the personality of programmers accurate, or are we missing something else? Let’s look into these old myths, and see if they hold up.
By Scio Team
When we think about programming and software, we tend to conjure a specific image in our minds, a stereotype that has accompanied the profession almost since the beginning: the image of a coder hacking away at the keyboard, immersed in a world of their own, without the need of much company.
However, if this was true at some point, it still is? The stereotype of the introverted programmer is an even mix of fact and myth, and here at Scio, where we know perfectly the talent we work with, we want to shed some light on the reality of people applying a special skill to create software.
Is it possible to profile a personality?
Since the days of the classic “Temperament Theory”, which tried to divide people into 4 distinct types (namely: Sanguine, Choleric, Melancholic, and Phlegmatic, which are pretty weird classifications if we are being honest), people had the impulse to try and understand their personalities, where they come from and how they affect their everyday lives.
More scientific approaches to these questions have evolved from the 20th century onwards, and today we understand that personality, affinities, and preferences are more fluid and flexible than we once thought, even if we simplify the whole idea for the sake of practicality.
The Myers-Briggs Type Indicator nowadays is one of the most popular systems to tackle this subject, going more in-depth on the inner workings of a person instead of just focusing on their outward behavior.
Going back to the idea of programmers as introverts, things like the MBTI bring some very interesting insights about this professional field and the people who feel compelled to it. What can we find there?
Let’s define “introversion”
What you need to know right now, is that the “introvert/extrovert” dichotomy is a little outdated, simplifying a vast swath of personality types into two neat boxes with little in-between. What the definition of “introversion” tries to convey under this understanding, is people who don’t have much affinity for a specific kind of social interactions, prefer more individual activities, or with a pretty select group of people.
Although many probably feel this way, reducing it to only these signifiers leaves a lot out. What the Myer-Briggs does is check the balance between the following:
Extraversion (E) versus introversion (I)
Sensing (S) versus intuition (N)
Thinking (T) versus feeling (F)
Judging (J) versus perceiving (P)
What this system maps out is the preference of the person, rather than the ability, so the metrics here assign percentages based on what a person would prefer to do in a given situation, ending up with a combination of 4 letters based on their highest percentages, like INTP or ESTJ. Please take note of the use of the word “extraversion” instead of “extroversion”, which will be important in a minute.
There are pros and cons to this approach, but the important part here is that we have a lot of historical data to see what large swathes of the population prefer, and in programming, the results are pretty interesting overall, challenging many of our notions about the “introvert coder” stereotype.
So… are programmers introverted or not?
We are getting there. First of all, since we are looking into preference instead of abilities, it’s important to note that certain groups, as a whole, will pick one instead of the other; it’s a decision (even if a subconscious one) instead of instinct, or impulse. For programmers, this preference goes towards Thinking (T) instead of Feeling (F), meaning that they like to analyze situations from a more objective point of view, not giving as much consideration to the emotional side of things
Now, this doesn’t mean they only do one of these things. It means that when compelled to act, people will feel more comfortable with a single approach, so if we look at coding, programming, or engineering (where you see lots of interconnected mechanisms balanced between “needs” and “wants”) people prefer Thinking (T) will be better at it. This post, titled “Does being an introvert make you a better coder?” puts it nicely:
“A typical software developer likes there to be a logical consistency behind a decision. It might not matter much what that consistency is, so long as it’s there. By contrast, other people prefer the ‘feel’ of the situation, using empathy and imagining what it is like more from other people’s point of view. In other words, there is a difference between coders and others, in how they tend to justify a decision.”
And as you can see, this has nothing to do with social preferences, or the ability to relate to people in any situation. That’s why this profiling system uses the word “extraversion”, referring to “the world of action, people, and things”, in contrast with “introversion”, or the world of ideas and reflection, both useful for doing complex things such as programming software.
“MBTI introverts prefer fewer, deeper, and more involved interactions with people, whereas extraverts prefer shorter and more frequent interaction. For getting to know users quickly, extraversion can be an advantage, but introverts are perfectly good at deep social interaction”, goes the cited blog. And it’s true; avoiding people has little to do with introversion, and the stereotype comes from misunderstanding what these words try to convey.
An alternative definition of the “introverted programmer”
So, to wrap things up, where does this leave the myth? As we said, maybe at some point in the past, before the development of agile methodologies or the normalization of a remote model of working, the stereotype of the “introverted programmer” was true and functional, but it no longer works that way.
People are more complicated than many of these systems will tell you, and lots of different preferences and abilities are desirable in any well-balanced team. What is true in the age of remote work, though, is that knowing how to interact and communicate well with your coworkers, clients, and managers at a distance are going to be a very valuable skill moving forward, and this has nothing to do with how one approaches the challenges of programming.
So we can leave behind all that and start thinking of the people best adapted to the work of programming in a different way; is no longer an introverted programmer, but a thinking one, whose intuition and affinity for code can be supplemented in a great way by social understanding and the clear communication that only the best Nearshore companies can offer.
Productivity is among the top-of-mind issues many companies getting into remote work are considering, and there’s a lot of information out there about its benefits and its drawbacks. So we looked closely at some of the myths about remote productivity and found very interesting stuff to discuss. Enjoy!
By Scio Team
It’s very clear now that our way of looking at work has changed, and the future of this relationship is just starting to be clear now. One could argue that remote work was an inevitability, the natural next step in many industries (technology and software especially) that don’t really require people to be on-site to collaborate and work together well.
However, as we’ve been discussing through interviews with Scio’s Founder and CEO Luis Aburto, and Senior Project Manager Jesús Magaña, there are a lot of moving parts involved in a successful remote work model, and one of the big questions when this trend picked up steam in 2020 was “would productivity remain the same?”
The answer was yes, and it even increased in many cases, but why? What are the mechanisms behind good productivity when working remotely or from home, what myths and facts get involved with the new normal way to work, and how can we harness its advantages for a modern organization?
Myth #1: Productivity is the only measure of success.
Truth:
One of the most interesting insights we got from our interview with Luis was that “thehealth of a team cannot be measured only in productivity terms”, referring to their emotional well-being and offering the appropriate support, watching out for signs of burnout, and he’s far from the only one to realize this.
Last year, Microsoft published a list of seven trends of remote work, and among them was the insight that “high productivity is masking an exhausted workforce”, which is important to understand why remote work is taking such a foothold, even beyond the pandemic. Workers today are finding out many advantages when working from their homes, and companies are seeing benefits allowing flexibility, because it generally results in a better life balance, and thus mental health.
Now, of course, productivity is important for any industry, and a software company needs to keep a close eye on the team’s progress to make sure a project is hitting its deadlines, but sometimes those requirements have an unrelated cost that can be alleviated with more freedom in the way we chose to work.
A hybrid model, where a collaborator only goes to the office a couple of days a week, or when they need the space for whatever reason (like meeting with clients or having Internet problems at home) works best, as it offers a way to keep up with the organization, while also leaving elbow room to attend your personal life.
Myth #2: Productivity happens continuously for everyone.
Fact:
Around 75% of workers polled by Microsoft mentioned that flexibility in their work hours is one of the top things they are looking for in a new job, and that tracks with the upcoming “Gen Z” entering the workforce during a pandemic.
The explanation behind that is simple: for many people, focus and productivity happen in bursts, and they do not always synchronize with the traditional 9:00 to 5:00, five days a week work schedule. Working remotely gives options, and letting the collaborator choose what suits them best allows for a better application of skills and effort, which is in the best interest of any organization.
Companies like Twitter, which implemented a permanent remote model, or Microsoft, which is experimenting with plenty of options (like working at the office until 3:00 pm to avoid rush hour in traffic), are seeing the benefits of this philosophy, and letting a collaborator adapt according to their bursts and stretches of productivity lends well to an industry that needs creativity and focus as often as software development.
This goes back to achieving a better balance in daily life. Having the ability to adjust to the day depending on the type and volume of work to be done. Do you need to collaborate with others or just get in and get some detailed coding work done? Having more than one check-in/check-out time (like we enjoy at Scio), can make a difference to an individual’s productivity.
Myth #3: Productivity depends entirely on the person.
Fact:
A big negative side-effect of moving away from in-person work at the office was the infrastructure needed to keep productivity moving along. From security measures to VPNs, and other reliable ways to connect to a company’s servers and have all the information you need at your disposal, it certainly resulted in slowdowns while many offices adjusted.
Companies like Scio, which are no strangers to these set-ups and have a lot of experience knowing what works and what doesn’t, know very well the value of selecting the right tools to keep everyone moving forward. In the case of a Nearshore company, for example, it also helps to build teams capable of adapting to the processes of the clients, so you have plenty of experience collaborating in all manners of ecosystems without issue.
What all this means is that there’s an incentive for the Management and IT departments of the world to be selective and careful about the tools they adopt for remote collaborators, which need to be comprehensive and reliable, but without interfering with the work itself.
Easily understandable CRMs that you can teach to someone over a Zoom call, ready access to databases and important files, effective training programs, clear and concise guidelines about Internet activity and cybersecurity, or applications that don’t impact productivity (or at least can be taken into account during a project) are a delicate balance to hit as more and more people choose to work off-site, but well thought off guarantees a successful adoption of remote work.
The Takeaways:
Today, new employees and collaborators will prioritize flexibility, and that trend is only going up, so it’s best to start adapting ways to offer it.
Flexibility results in better productivity, as it gives people the chance to work at their best productivity times.
Choosing the right collaboration tools that doesn’t hinder productivity is going to increase in priority to maintain productivity and minimizing the impact of any measure implemented in an organization.
As of now, a hybrid model is proving to work best, giving plenty of options to keep a cohesive team that also respects personal time.
Even if the software industry is open for everyone with talent and dedication, women historically had to overcome more challenges to carve their own spaces. So we had a chat with Gilda Villaseñor about her work with Technovation, and the motivation to bring more women into this profession.
I was fortunate enough to never notice the idea that math was for men, and women should focus on areas like the Humanities. So when I was in middle school, I started playing chess, and I think that gave me a certain mindset that helped me identify or generate some complex scenarios in my head, and analyze them carefully.
I trained that part of my mind often, but without thinking of a specific professional area to apply it until my mom signed me up for a computer workshop. Both of my parents are doctors who worked at the IMSS (the Mexican healthcare system), and they had a coworker in the IT department that was always telling them about how computers were coming strong, and as they always had been curious about everything new, said: “Well, let’s get her into it to see what happens”.
I didn’t put any resistance to the idea, to be honest. Back then, my siblings had a very strong affinity for art, and they were always doing something related to it. It was something I wasn’t interested in at all, so I was the one that never had anything to do on weekends, and I joined that class.
Well, it turned out that I was good at the logic needed to write programs; they taught us how to write very simple procedural programs, but I realized that I understood those things quicker than all of my classmates and made things work faster when I was writing code. In the beginning, it was just a hobby, though, until I started high school and realized that I was better at the Computer class than the rest of my friends, so when I was finishing school, I decided I wanted to study something that could take me out of the city, and among my options were Computer Science, which was available at the Tecnológico de Morelia, but I wanted something different.
In the beginning, everything was fine, but during my last years of college and my first professional years, I started to notice very few women doing the same things as me, although I didn’t question it until I started hearing the stories of other women in the field. And it was when I reached a certain level when I noticed how my knowledge and experience were sometimes questioned without reason, and I wasn’t advancing as easily as my male colleagues, finding certain resistance to my authority when I started climbing up the hierarchy.
Also, having to decelerate my professional career when I chose to exercise my maternity, and the difficulty of having to juggle my job with taking care of my kids took a toll, as I couldn’t keep my rhythm the way some of my male coworkers could, which is part of the reason why I wanted to change things for myself and any woman working on this industry.
I started my volunteer work in an international program called Technovation. I was there between 2016 and 2019 until it had to stop because of the pandemic, and although I’m not active on that initiative right now, I am collaborating with others that try to bring more women to technology, business, and even writing, where we do women groups helping each other to break the stereotypes and current models, seeking to attain better conditions.
I have always had the impulse to seek a way to improve the conditions of everyone around us, from how we treat each other, to what happens during the professional growth of my colleagues. What started my dedication to this was a women-exclusive event I attended once, where all of these women talked about the challenges and problems they faced at work when they start to climb up in the ladder, and that’s how I started to realize many things I never questioned before, like how few female managers I’ve had, which I believed were just the way things were.
These testimonies, and seeing what other women were already doing in similar organizations and volunteer programs, as part of a greater initiative to support women, fired me up and made me want to get involved.
Some other female colleagues and I started seeing what was happening in other cities of Mexico, and started to investigate what we would do here in Morelia; we were a group of professionals seeking a way to start changing things, looking for a way to join initiatives directed at women in software.
So that next year I found the international initiative of Tehcnovation with Maria Makarovaand other women showing us what that program was about, what they did, and the things they were achieving with girls between 10 and 18 years old, and everything around that.
We brought this program to Morelia and started with some girls from residential care and private schools, and the year after that we worked with girls from an association that helps kids in underserved communities, helping them obtain an academic education from elementary school until they are ready for college.
We were surprised by the high level of engagement they showed and integrating them into these kinds of efforts is very satisfying for them, and us as mentors. You learn a lot from this labor and it’s gratifying to see kids and young women acquire new skills, especially when they see the possibilities of technology, and the communities we build for and by women.
The biggest challenge I saw was that, since this was an international program, most of the resources we used were in English, and although we do the effort to translate everything we could, some of the books and materials were still in another language, so we had to do some additional things for the girls that couldn’t understand it, or they learned to translate, using what they had at hand, like online translators and such, to learn.
Outside of that, everything else was a great collaboration, with some sponsorships from the local government, which lent us some spaces to do these workshops, and help from Universities and local companies, like Scio, BlueBox, IA Interactive, and Fundación Amamba A.C., in the form of facilities and coffee breaks for the events.
I saw a lot of collaboration and the desire to be part of a change for women, where talented people are always needed, and in most cases the resources exist to keep pushing forward these kinds of efforts, bringing lots of institutions to collaborate and be part of the change.
Back when I started, most of the interactions I had at work were with men; if the teams I collaborated with had 10 members, there would be a single woman in there at most, so I normally worked just with men. But in the last decade, I’ve been noticing a difference; I see more women in development teams, or the software industry in general, not only in departments that require soft skills but in high positions in a company that used to be solely men.
A lot of it has to do with the benefits that are starting to be offered in the industry, with spaces open for us. Now is very fortunate to have the option of working from home, and the women that are having kids now, have the chance to focus better on the very demanding task of raising children.
So, things like these had to do with necessities exclusive to women, but that has an impact in a whole context, and I see how they are starting to change. There’s a lot left to do, but benefits and offerings like that are becoming the norm in the industry.
Technovation is about inspiring and orienting young women to follow a technical career, showing them they can. That empowers them immensely, and through workshops about technology and business to create, launch and market products, essentially teaching them how to create a start-up, teaching them to be independent, and enjoy what they do.
More everyday situations are covered in talks and events targeted towards slightly older women. For example, when a woman decides to get married, for some it’s not easy to balance a marital and professional life, because this prejudice about women having to devote themselves to their homes still exists, and even more when motherhood and children are involved. These topics get touched more on the writing groups I mentioned, where the stories we write we reflect on ourselves, the world we navigate, and we confirm that most of the times we are positioned in a disadvantaged place, but we work intellectually, emotionally, and psychologically to overcome these situations, creating sorority ties between us.
We are starting to shift our places in the world. If you compare past and new generations, I think we are already changing our self-perception, how we see each other, and how we accept ourselves. What’s next is bringing these changes to our workplaces, fighting for places with more favorable conditions for women, taking into account our necessities, our specific contexts, opening spaces for us to communicate and collaborate.
In the tech industry, right now there are a lot of incentives and resources being invested, and for women, it’s a place to reach economic independence, with the option to move freely and choose for yourself, which is why I want to encourage more women to try this area.
The women from Mentoralia, the association that organizes the Technovation program in all of Mexico, are starting to develop other similar workshops, and it was with them that I started to bring these efforts to Morelia. I always had their support, and that opened plenty of doors for me to meet incredible women from all over Mexico, which is incredible and it’s a good incentive for anyone looking to join as a volunteer, as it is something we are passionate about, and we build networks of female friends and colleagues that have a good time together while changing the prejudice and stereotypes linked with software, trying to bring a future where women never have to question if they have the space to join in an important professional area such as technology.
The field of software development has a lot of roads, some are more challenging than others. And for Nati Lara, a Front-End dev currently living in Denmark and mom to a toddler, these experiences have been incredible. How does remote work and software impact her job as a mom and developer?
By Scio Team
Whenever someone asks me what I do for a living and I tell them I’m a software developer, the response almost always is “You must be very smart!”, because this preconceived notion of this job is that only the more intelligent persons can do it and, well, no.
It’s like when I see a carpenter doing their thing, and I say to myself “I could never do that”, but if it really interests you and you want to make your ideas into reality, it’s within everyone’s reach.
I started programming back in High School when a teacher helped us learn to use Delfi by designing a simple website. It was a very interesting exercise, having to do an entire page by myself; it was the final project of the semester and everyone did whatever they wanted, but I got really into it.
It was a gripping challenge because the teacher didn’t explain much, so we had to make with whatever solution and tools we had on hand, and I liked that a lot. Delfi already has some basics, so we didn’t have to start from scratch, writing zeroes and ones, which changed my ideas of programming. I used to think it was a black screen with green text on it like in the movies, so it was a different experience.
I used to like computers a lot as a kid, my parents got their first one when I was 10 years old, but I didn’t know anything that had to do with programming. I was curious about interfaces, not as much as the inner workings, and that’s what I specialize in today.
That’s why I do Front-End in iOS, I like things where I can see the result. I don’t get too much into Back-End stuff, where I don’t have a clear vision of how things are working, I prefer working on things where I can see the immediate result.
As a developer, the best feeling I get is when I can put my ideas in motion, and make something useful out of them, building a work of art without using my hands directly, so to speak. I like working with others, knowing everything about every part of a project, and contributing in a specific direction. The client I’m currently working with makes vegan and vegetarian food; the chefs here run the kitchen and develop recipes that avoid meat, trying to show that the absence of it still results in a good dish.
Their clients subscribe to the app I’m maintaining, and they get pre-made meals for three days, all vegan. There are many ideas involved with this project, like showing how much CO2 is being saved by avoiding the consumption of meat. I like it because, beyond the food, it tries to show the individual impact we have, and it even changed my conception of vegan and vegetarianism, which has changed since I work here and now I want to do my part.
The road here wasn’t a straight line. I originally studied Art and Digital Animation, because even though I always had some affinity for STEM stuff, I also liked creativity, drawing, and graphic design, but I didn’t want to go completely in that direction. So I tried something that had a bit of everything, but I ended up realizing that I liked it a lot, but maybe I wasn’t as good at it.
At some point, I started developing web pages with a friend that wasn’t very good at programming, but skilled at designing, so we started taking freelance jobs where I did the technical stuff and she did the visual part of the project.
That is how I ended up pursuing a Master’s degree in Software Development because I found it the best way to keep in touch with both worlds. I’m a developer, and I like having an opinion on everything visually going on during a project; when doing a website, I like to make sure everything lines up, looks good and works well. Even if I don’t consider myself the best designer, I like to pay attention to the details of it by programming.
For a degree like this, a proportion of 30% women does not sound like a lot, but it is, even if women are the most prone to abandon it before finishing. In Digital Design it was more balanced, around 50/50 or so, but here it was a noticeable difference. I think this ratio holds in most engineering careers, and in our culture at least, more women go for careers in Humanities like Arts or Social Studies, and a lot less in STEM.
My dad was a teacher, and he always raised us close to the sciences, so it wasn’t an issue for me, but my parents did prevent me from trying things like sports, especially soccer. I mean, I still don’t play it, but I also never had the opportunity, even if my dad somehow planted the seeds of interest in sciences like math.
As a female developer, though, I have never felt out of place or made feel less, although I’ve never worked full time in Mexico. I currently live in Denmark, and so far I have been the only woman in the Tech team of both companies I have worked at.
There were more women at school, that’s for sure, but right now we are fifteen people in the Development department, and to be honest, I like it that way. A lot of owners and entrepreneurs are feeling the pressure of attracting women to close the gap between male and female developers, so it has been easy for me so far to find a place to work. Being a woman in this industry is an advantage some of the time. There’s nothing to be intimidated by.
It’s even funny sometimes. At work parties, I’m the only one trying to dress well and use make-up, and my friends like to joke about it, saying that my job is making sure everything looks great, so of course, I do those things.
That being said, it’s curious to notice that, at companies like Scio for example, most women tend to gravitate towards analytical and QA stuff. I wonder why that is. I’ve never met another woman doing Test Automation or things like that; last year a girl started working with us in Full-Stack but doing Data Analytics, and everyone else has always been men.
It’s something I talk about a lot. I have many friends dedicated to Humanities, and we always discuss the differences between our fields; in the case of one of them, her office is almost purely women, with one or two guys here and there. I guess there are many reasons for it, and I have wondered before why it’s so important to close gaps in certain areas.
I don’t see a field dominated by either gender as something inherently wrong, if these differences were dictated by more biological, natural affinities, like women being more social or men being more analytic. But when those exclusions are cultural when we try to separate genders from childhood by allowing kids to play with certain toys only, we are creating inequality, and something should be done about it. And this is a change that we are not going to see in the next year or two, but it will take maybe an entire generation to change these points of view.
Now, in the actual job, do these differences matter? Maybe I have different aesthetic sensibilities and ideas of how things should look, so I can tell my coworkers an application needs, but I’m not sure that’s because I’m a woman, or because I have a background in Design. Who knows?
Being a developer has also brought other advantages for me. I have a son currently four years old, and working in software gave me a lot of leeways to define my schedules and limits, define my own way to work, and leave enough time for my family. I feel like I’m more productive, with better control of my time, and applying a developer point of view to raising my kid, where I accomplish big things by dividing it into smaller tasks, finishing each, and going from there, has helped me a lot.
Also, I’m used to staying up very late at night, so being a developer has also helped me a lot with that. Working in software, then, is very freeing and flexible, and I’m glad I could do it even before I was a mom. I don’t have to go to the office all the time, I can get along anywhere and the pay is not bad at all, so my quality of life is something I’m really happy about.
The idea of a future when AI can perform all sorts of tasks, even programming, is irresistible, but is it something feasible? Is programming a job that can be done by machines, and if not, why?
By Scio Team
One of the biggest leaps of these past two decades, and indeed the most intriguing technology development of the 21st Century, is the advancement of Artificial Intelligence that seems to occur every day. It is understandable why; science fiction technology has a sort of magnetism that attracts all kinds of engineers, entrepreneurs, and visionaries, many of them with the cash to back up the R&D necessary to bring these visions to life.
AI also has the allure of being potentially implemented anywhere, automatizing plenty of daily tasks to free up our time. It’s also attractively dangerous, as countless Terminator jokes can attest every time a new development hits the news.
However, what is actually feasible for AI to accomplish? What are its real applications, at least for now? For the last 7 years or so, there have been some talks about AI being capable of performing more intensive labor, programming, and development among them, but is the job of the programmer in danger of being done by a robot?
It’s easy to imagine, at least. Plenty of tools already use some measure of AI to function, and interesting experiments crop up daily, from intelligent chatbots to autonomous machines. But are those tasks comparable to the actual job of programming in any way? Because as an engineer or developer knows, writing code is just a small part of the whole process of creating software.
“Processing large amounts of data? Software’s great at that. Figuring out what a human wants, or what a usable UI is like, or what the real problem you need to solve is… those are hard”, says an entry in the blog Code Without Rules titled “When AI replaces programmers”, which goes directly to the big issue in a future of machine-produced code.
Although there have been some advancements on the idea of teaching an AI to write code and produce entire programs, like the experiment done by Andrej Karpathy in 2015 where he trained a neural network with GitHub’s Linux repositories to write its own code, the results are still mixed. According to the site Perforce.com:
“[The] AI generated code (including functions and function declarations) overnight. It had parameters, variables, loops, and correct indents. Brackets were opened and later closed. It even had comments. However, the AI produced code had syntactic errors. It didn’t keep track of variable names. Sometimes variables were declared but never used. Other times variables were used but not defined.”
Of course, this was way back in 2015, and the technology behind these networks has only improved since then, but the actual viability of letting a machine program by itself one day, especially for more critical areas like Defense, Finance, or Healthcare, it’s still far away and will still be at the mercy of human instruction.
The advantage of outsourcing these kinds of tasks, be it to a remote developer or an entire Nearshore company, is the ability to communicate clearly anything you may want in the software produced. Collaboration is constant, communication is key, and the skill to apply different ways to solve issues is a given in any valuable development team.
This is to say, the “creativity” involved in these kinds of efforts is still a long way off, and having this skill while programming is critical to producing code that solves actual problems and accomplishes the expectations of both clients and final users.
“There have been some experiments before, even since the 90s, with tools whose purpose was to generate applications”, explains Adolfo Cruz, Scio’s Project Management Director, and the best person to have an idea of where this technology is going. “If you wanted to generate a User Form, for example, you defined the parameters (first name, last name, age, date, etc.) and these programs delivered a simple but functional result.”
“Those very early tried, but they worked and now it’s evolving to full-on Artificial Intelligence. However, if these tools become a reality, they’ll probably lack the spark of human imagination. During development, a programmer sometimes gets ideas about cool features that could add value to a project, and these kinds of things will be difficult to achieve for a machine.”
“But beyond that, I think we’ll see software coded by machines. Maybe there will be a point when an AI can understand and interpret the user, getting a command like “create a chat program” and propose three options, which can be narrowed by the user.”
For sure, these three options would not take any time at all for a machine, but deciding which path to take from there, refining and redefining options, could be a tiring process, although, in terms of man/hours invested, it’ll need a lot less effort than having multiple people working on this same project.
“Still, there are a lot of questions unanswered”, Adolfo concluded. “How long would it take to explain exactly what you want, what frustrations would that cause, and how that impacts the adoption of this technology is a whole discussion to have. It’s not simply about technical feasibility, but acceptance among the public.”
