Article illustration 1

In a tech landscape increasingly dominated by AI evangelism, Thomas Dohmke's recent vision of developers evolving into AI 'orchestrators' struck a chord—but not the harmonious one he intended. Victor Wynne's incisive response dismantles this narrative, revealing a critical oversight: the erasure of developer autonomy in the rush to embrace artificial intelligence. Far from a mere tool debate, this clash exposes a deeper tension about who controls the soul of software development.

The Problem with Prescribed Progression

Dohmke's framework—categorizing developers into Skeptics, Explorers, Collaborators, and Strategists—frames AI adoption as an inevitable, linear journey. Yet, as Wynne argues, this ignores the fundamental truth that developers excel through tailored workflows, not top-down mandates. "The piece paints a picture of inevitable change, but it glosses over a fundamental principle: the right to choose your own tools and approach," Wynne writes. This isn't nostalgia; it's a defense of craftsmanship. Developers who meticulously hand-code algorithms aren't relics—they're often uncovering optimizations AI might miss, embedding deep system understanding that pays dividends in debugging or performance tuning.

"Software development has never been just about typing out syntax as fast as possible. The real work happens in understanding problems, designing elegant solutions, and making architectural decisions."

Wynne's critique extends to Dohmke's economic blind spots. The promotion of "top-tier subscriptions" as a benchmark for developer relevance excludes those in open-source, small startups, or budget-conscious roles, creating an unjust hierarchy. Worse, it risks stifling innovation: a monoculture of AI-first thinkers could overlook breakthroughs born from unconventional, hands-on methods that have historically propelled the field.

Diversity as a Strength, Not a Weakness

The article powerfully refutes the one-size-fits-all fallacy, highlighting how domains like embedded medical systems or high-performance computing demand precision that AI's "black box" can't safely replicate. Here, skepticism isn't resistance—it's responsibility. Wynne observes, "Developers in these fields aren’t resisting change out of stubbornness; they’re making responsible technical decisions." This diversity of roles—from game builders to safety engineers—underscores why AI should augment, not replace, human expertise.

Ultimately, Wynne calls for an ecosystem that celebrates multiplicity: the AI strategist, the meticulous coder, and everyone in between. The future of development isn't a destination but a spectrum, where tools serve the developer, not vice versa. As the industry grapples with AI's promise, Wynne's manifesto reminds us that true progress lies in preserving the freedom to think differently—because the best code emerges not from conformity, but from choice.

Source: Victor Wynne, Developers, not operators