I Didn’t Become an Engineer to Write Prompts.

This is the golden era of engineering.

This is the best time to be a developer.

I’m building 100 ideas. I’ve never felt this powerful and productive.

I keep reading and hearing these statements.

And honestly? I can’t relate.

I’m an engineer who just wants to write code for my job, solve real problems, get recognized for my problem-solving skills — and that’s it. I’m not into building endless side projects. I’m not excited about “just create things because AI exists.” That hype doesn’t move me.

For someone like me, when AI starts doing most of the job I trained for, this doesn’t feel like a golden era.

My motivation to go to work or even log in every morning came from knowing I was doing something that only a small percentage of humans could do well. That’s what made it meaningful. That’s what made it worth it.

Now? It feels like it’s just a prompt away.

And that slowly pulls me away from engineering instead of pulling me deeper into it.

When I bring this up with fellow engineers, I hear the same responses every time:

1 . “But AI code isn’t that good.”

2 . “We still need experienced engineers to tell AI what to do.”

3 . “Think of AI as your junior.”

4 . “Performance isn’t great yet.”

Hear me for once - all of these arguments collapse the moment leadership decides speed matters more than quality.

The moment someone says, “We need to ship faster. AI is there, right?” The moment estimations get cut because “you can just use AI.” The moment scaling issues happen and the answer is, “Can’t we just make AI handle it?”

That’s when the philosophical defense of craftsmanship dies.

It’s not about whether AI code is perfect. It’s about how organizations use it.

And right now, it feels less like empowerment and more like replacement.

<RANT_OVER>