FIRST ON FOX: President Donald Trump's White House is warning that a key Democrat's move to end the president's energy national emergency would kill hundreds of jobs and cost $3.6 trillion in higher prices and lost energy output. 

"Tim Kaine wants to impoverish Americans. President Donald Trump’s executive order brings America into the future and unleashes prosperity. Senator [Tim] Kaine wants to cost the economy trillions and risk losing nearly a million jobs," said deputy press secretary Anna Kelly in an exclusive statement to Fox News Digital. 

The White House's statement is in response to Sen. Tim Kaine, D-Va., and ranking member of the Senate Energy and Natural Resources Committee Martin Heinrich, D-N.M., filing a joint resolution to end Trump's energy national emergency and teeing up a vote on the Senate floor this week.

ETHICS WATCHDOG FLAGS SENATOR HELPING MAKE MILLIONS FOR WIFE'S GREEN NONPROFIT

Ending the energy emergency would lead to the loss of 869,800 jobs, according to a White House document obtained by Fox News Digital. 

The White House emphasized that ending the emergency would usher back in the Biden administration's policies. The document stressed that under those policies, during Biden's first two years, families spent an additional average of $10,000 in energy costs, citing a study published by the Committee to Unleash Prosperity. 

The document cited that estimates of liquefied natural gas growth in the new administration were projected to bring in half a million jobs annually and boost U.S. GDP by $1.3 trillion through 2040, per a study by S&P Global in December. 

TRUMP TAX CUT PLAN HITS TURBULENCE AHEAD OF HOUSE VOTE AS REPUBLICANS SPLIT

"The Trump Administration is living in a fantasy land," Kaine and Heinrich told Fox News Digital in a joint statement. "Energy demand is high and only getting higher, which is why it’s great that America is producing more energy than at any other point in our history. Decreasing the supply of American-made energy when demand is high is the quickest way to raise prices—and that’s exactly what President Trump’s sham energy emergency will do. By tampering with the market to favor some forms of energy over others and making it easier for fossil fuel companies to take Americans’ private property, Trump’s emergency declaration will benefit Big Oil, but leave American consumers with fewer choices and higher bills."

"At the same time, Trump’s decision to illegally halt investments appropriated by Congress in energy projects that are creating jobs in communities across the country is costing Americans valuable, good-paying jobs," they added. 

The two Democrats unveiled their privileged legislation against Trump's order earlier this month.

FOLLOWING KEY WINS, TRUMP POISED FOR CABINET COMPLETION IN RECORD TIME

"Senate Democrats are yet again attempting to block President Trump's efforts to secure cheaper, more reliable energy—just when America needs it most," Senate Committee on Energy and Natural Resources Chairman Mike Lee, R-Utah, said in a statement to Fox News Digital.

"Their message to families is clear: pay more, expect less. Luckily, President Trump is committed to unleashing American energy and rescuing the country from the energy crisis that they have perpetuated. Senate Republicans won't let Democrats delay and obstruct any longer and will ensure the President has the tools necessary to deliver the results the American people expect."

SENATE BORDER BUDGET TRIUMPHS AFTER ALL-NIGHT SESSION WHILE TRUMP-BACKED HOUSE BILL LAGS

Kaine and Heinrich's introduction of the resolution will force a vote on the Senate floor, which is expected to occur on Wednesday. 

The measure is likely to fail, with Republicans vocally supportive of Trump's energy agenda. The GOP has a 53-seat majority in the upper chamber.

Georgia Republican Rep. Andrew Clyde, who earlier this month announced he was drafting articles of impeachment against a Rhode Island judge overseeing one of President Donald Trump's legal challenges, condemned judges who continue to bar Trump's agenda from being implemented. 

Clyde is working in conjunction with Rep. Eli Crane, R-Ariz., who is also preparing impeachment articles against U.S. District Judge Paul Engelmayer. The Georgia Republican said the real victims of judicial pushback against Trump's policies are the American people. 

"You're not just hurting the president," Clyde told Fox News Digital. "You're hurting the American people because they're the ones who elected him, and they're the ones who want him to do this – to exercise these specific authorities. And these judges are really denying the American people their rights."

IMPEACHMENT THREAT HITS JUDGE WHO BLOCKED TRUMP FEDERAL FUNDING FREEZE

Clyde threatened to file articles of impeachment against District Judge John McConnell who, at the time, filed a motion ordering the Trump administration to comply with a previous restraining order. The order temporarily blocked the administration’s efforts to pause federal grants and loans. 

McConnell has since come under fire from Trump supporters and conservatives who have accused him of being a liberal activist after a 2021 video of him saying courts must "stand and enforce the rule of law, that is, against arbitrary and capricious actions by what could be a tyrant or could be whatnot" resurfaced online.  

"You have to take a moment and realize that this, you know, middle-class, White, male, privileged person needs to understand the human being that comes before us that may be a woman, may be Black, may be transgender, may be poor, may be rich, may be – whatever," McConnell said in the video, according to WPRI.

KEY HOUSE DEMOCRAT RIPS MUSK FOR USURPING PRESIDENTIAL POWERS, SAYS SOME HAVE DISCUSSED IMPEACHMENT

Clyde acknowledged that judges have their own opinions and "they're certainly entitled to them, but they're not overt and political in mentioning them," saying "they don't want to be seen as potentially having a conflict of interest."

"And I think that's very, very much the case when it comes to both Judge Engelmayer and Judge McConnell," the lawmaker said. 

Since taking office in January, activist and legal groups, along with elected officials, local jurisdictions and individuals, have launched more than 70 lawsuits against the administration. The legal challenges cover Trump's executive order on birthright citizenship, the Department of Government Efficiency's (DOGE) efforts to slash unnecessary government spending, and Trump's removal of various federal employees. 

DOJ ISSUES COMPLAINT ABOUT FEDERAL JUDGE’S ‘MISCONDUCT’ WHILE PRESIDING OVER MILITARY TRANS BAN COURT CASE

With regard to the specific suits over DOGE's actions, Clyde told Fox News Digital he expects the president to "prevail on the merits of his case."

"I think the president will certainly prevail on the merits of his case. He has the authority under Article II of the Constitution," Clyde said. "But yet for the entire time of the restraining order, the judge will have prevented this duly elected authority from being exercised by the president. And also, they will have prevented the American people from dealing with waste, fraud and abuse in their government."

Clyde said he hopes other members of Congress join his and Crane's efforts to continue holding judges accountable, saying those barring Trump's agenda from being implemented "need to understand that they're not going to get away with it."

"They can't just stop the president from doing what the Constitution gives him the authority to do, and the people have given him the authority to do," Clyde said. 

Fox News Digital's Elizabeth Elkind and Diana Stancy contributed to this report. 

The Trump administration's Friday evening shakeup at the Pentagon saw the firing of six senior officers as Secretary Pete Hegseth made good on promises to upend the agency's leadership. 

President Donald Trump and Hegseth fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Gen. C.Q. Brown, and replaced him with a relatively unknown figure in Lt. Gen. Dan Caine. 

The choice of Caine shows the president’s preference for irregular warfare and special operations: Caine was among a group of military leaders who met with the president in December 2018 at the Al Asad airbase in Iraq. Trump was there to deliver a Christmas message and hear from commanders on the ground, and there Caine told Trump they could defeat ISIS quickly with a surge of resources and a lifting of restrictions on engagement. 

"'We’re only hitting them from a temporary base in Syria,'" Trump said Caine told him. "'But if you gave us permission, we could hit them from the back, from the side, from all over – from the base that you’re right on, right now, sir. They won’t know what the hell hit them.'" 

TRUMP NOMINATES AIR FORCE LT. GEN. DAN 'RAZIN' CAINE FOR JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF CHAIRMAN

"It was a different message than [Trump] had gotten from leadership at the Pentagon, and I think that really made an impression," according to Rob Greenway, a former National Security Council official who was on the trip and has known Caine since they graduated from Virginia Military Institute together. 

Trump, on picking Caine Friday, lauded him as "an accomplished pilot, national security expert, successful entrepreneur, and a ‘warfighter’ with significant interagency and special operations experience."

He’d plucked the retired general from relative obscurity to serve as his senior military adviser after accusing his predecessor, C.Q. Brown of pushing a "woke" agenda at the Pentagon. Brown had been behind a 2022 memo laying out diversity goals for the Air Force. 

Caine does not meet the position's prerequisites, such as being a combatant commander or service chief, and will require a waiver to be confirmed to the position. 

But the choice leaves Pentagon watchers curious on what direction Caine will take at his new high-level post. 

"Caine hasn’t written much, we’re sort of trying to read the tea leaves here," said Mark Cancian, a senior defense advisor at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. 

Greenway called Caine "an absolutely inspired pick, a tremendous officer with a remarkable background, and he has the confidence in the president." 

Trump was undoubtedly attracted to his reputation as an aggressive fighter pilot that earned him the nickname "Razin" Caine. But Caine’s nontraditional path throughout the military ranks and the business world was surely a selling point, according to Greenway.

$1,300 COFFEE CUPS, 8,000% OVERPAY FOR SOAP DISPENSERS SHOW WASTE AS DOGE LOCKS IN ON PENTAGON

"It’s a priority of the president to have the Pentagon pass an audit, to have someone who knows what a balance sheet looks like, and can hopefully help the department get to the right side of it."

The Pentagon has failed seven straight audits and the Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) has set its sights on budget cuts at DOD. 

Caine, an F-16 pilot by background, spent time as the top military liaison to the CIA, an Air National Guard officer and regional airline founder in Texas. He was a White House fellow at the Agriculture Department and a counterterrorism specialist on the White House’s Homeland Security Council.

From 2018-19, he was deputy commander of Special Operations Joint Task Force – Operation Inherent Resolve, which has been fighting the Islamic State since 2014, though little is publicly known about his role in that operation. The role of airstrikes, however, grew during that time, including clandestine ones, and Trump designated airstrike approval to commanders rather than the White House. 

But critics say Caine, like Hegseth, does not have the command experience for the role as Trump's top military advisor. 

"Trump sees [the role] as somebody who has the ability to move forces and direct funding, and it just doesn't work that way. That's not what the role is. So now you have a president who has people around him who are his principal advisors, [Hegseth] and this new chairman, who really have limited qualifications at the more senior levels," said Gene Moran, former advisor to the chairman of the Joint Chiefs and founder of lobbying firm Capitol Integration. 

The administration also relieved Adm. Lisa Franchetti, chief of naval operations – who Hegseth believed had been given the job because she was a woman – Gen. Jim Slife, Air Force vice chief of staff, and the judge advocates general of the Army, Navy and Air Force. 

"If naval operations suffer, at least we can hold our heads high. Because at least we have another first! The first female member of the Joint Chiefs of Staff – hooray," Hegseth wrote in his 2024 book, "The War on Warriors." 

"The Navy, in particular, has been unable to complete a procurement program on time and on budget and notoriously has decommissioned more ships than it’s made," said Greenway. "So I think the message there was accountability has to be restored." 

FORMER CHAIRMAN OF THE JOINT CHIEFS OF STAFF BIDS FAREWELL IN HEARTFELT SOCIAL MEDIA POST: ‘DISTINCT HONOR’

The switch-up of judge advocates general could be the biggest signal of policy change, where Hegseth has looked to grant greater authority to forces on the ground without having to worry about legal constraints. 

The judge advocates general, the top uniformed attorneys of the Army, Air Force and Navy, oversee the legal advisors for each branch and the defense counsel and prosecutors for courts-martial. 

Hegseth has spoken out against what he sees as an "obsessive" prosecution of war crimes. "He wants to give the benefit of the doubt to the warfighter, if there’s not, you know, an absolute massacre," one source familiar with the defense secretary’s thinking said.  

"Ultimately, we want lawyers who give sound constitutional advice and don’t exist to attempt to be roadblocks to anything that happens," the Pentagon chief told Fox News on Sunday. 

"Hegseth has said the troops should do what they need to achieve victory and not feel constrained by the lawyers," said Cancian. "But then you could have some actions that are contrary to international law or treaties, that could make a huge controversy, both domestically and with our allies."

But the advancement of Caine, with his covert operations background, and the removal of the top lawyers would signal a new focus on covert operations – a push that would line up with new terrorism designations for cartels in Latin America – and could set the military up for covert counter-narcotics strikes south of the border. 

"We could definitely see a change in troop postures in some of these regions we've been in for too long, and new missions in Mexico going after the cartels," another Hegseth ally said. 

President Donald Trump’s decision to fire several high-ranking military leaders is a first step in helping the president achieve his goal of a military more focused on lethality.

"It’s a bold move… you could even say it’s fairly aggressive," William Ruger, the President of the American Institute for Economic Research (AIER) and a former Trump nominee for ambassador to Afghanistan, told Fox News Digital. "There’s a sense that I get that this isn’t merely a challenge to one or two individuals, but that there needed to be a greater push to change the direction the Pentagon has been going… in terms of lethality, warrior ethos."

Ruger, who serves as an officer in the U.S. Navy Reserve, was "a prominent advocate for ending America’s participation in the Afghanistan War," according to his AIER profile page.

The comments come after Trump fired the chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, Air Force Gen. C.Q. Brown, as well as several other top military officers over the weekend, a list that also included the U.S. Navy's top officer, Adm. Lisa Franchetti, the first woman to lead one of the military branches.

OBAMA FIRED TOP MILITARY OFFICERS TO ALIGN PENTAGON WITH HIS POLICY VISION, NOW TRUMP SET TO DO THE SAME

The dramatic move reportedly caused "upheaval" at the Pentagon, according to a Reuters report, while critics were quick to pounce on Trump’s decision.

"Firing uniformed leaders as a type of political loyalty test, or for reasons relating to diversity and gender that have nothing to do with performance, erodes the trust and professionalism that our service members require to achieve their missions," the top Democrat on the Senate Armed Services Committee, Sen. Jack Reed, of Rhode Island, told Reuters, whose report called the firings "unprecedented."

But Defense Secretary Pete Hegseth pushed back against that characterization, arguing during an appearance on "Fox News Sunday" that Trump "deserves to pick his key national security advisory team."

"Nothing about this is unprecedented," Hegseth said, noting that there have been "lots of presidents who made changes," specifically citing Franklin D. Roosevelt, George H.W. Bush and Barack Obama, who Hegseth argued "fired or dismissed hundreds" of military officials.

OFFICIALS PUSH BACK ON CLAIMS OF 'LIST' OF GENERALS HEGSETH PLANS TO FIRE AT PENTAGON

In the most recent example, Obama made the decision to relieve Army Gen. David McKiernan as the commander of U.S. forces in Afghanistan five months into the president’s term in office in 2009, marking the first time a wartime commander had been dismissed since 1951.

According to Ruger, the main point of the firings will be to allow Trump to have trusted military advisors to carry out his vision for the future of the force.

"The president had good reason for trying to do this, believing that the military was not led by the admirals and generals that were necessary to implement his vision of our defense structure," Ruger said. "We should have some caution here in thinking that there’s anything amiss."

Ruger also noted that the moves align more closely to Hegseth’s vision for the military, which he believes will "focus on lethality and the warrior ethos, as opposed to some of the more… identitarianism that we had seen creeping into the military."

Perhaps more importantly, Ruger stressed that Trump’s ability to shake up military leadership as he sees fit is critical to the U.S.’s time-tested tradition of civilian leadership over the military.

"It’s important that for good civil military relations purposes, that it’s clear who is the decision maker, and that should be the civilians, and that what they say will be faithfully implemented," Ruger said. "That’s the hallmark of good civil military relations."

• It's a tough job market out there, and experienced workers are not exempt.
• Some older Americans just want a few more years of work to boost retirement savings or stay busy.
• The jobs that are available don't pay enough to make them worthwhile, job seekers said.

Gino Marconi is struggling to secure full-time work, and it's messing with his retirement plans.

Marconi, who's 64 and lives in Plantation, Florida, earned $60,000 annually as a sales representative for an outdoor supply company until two years ago, when he resigned due to the stress of working long days on the road. Marconi previously held engineering jobs that paid more.

Since then, he said he's applied to over 600 remote and in-person roles across various industries and skill levels. He suspects many positions have rejected him because he's overqualified, and he's removed the years he's completed some degrees and certifications from some applications.

Marconi said he hopes to retire in a few years and rely on Social Security income, but his plans could change if he's unable to find higher-paying work.

"My home is paid off, my cars are paid off," Marconi said. "But I need to keep going until I get back to work."

Are you an older American who is still working or looking for work? Please fill out this quick Google Form.

As many Americans reach retirement age, they don't find themselves coasting into their golden years as easily as they may have hoped. Instead, as hundreds of older Americans told Business Insider in responses to reader surveys about work and retirement, they find themselves once again on the job market. Maybe they got laid off or quit a career due to health issues. Either way, they need just a few more years to reach a comfortable financial position — and it's tough out there for job seekers.

To be sure, the unemployment rate for Americans age 55 and older was just 3% as of January, compared to 4% for all workers. But for people of all ages who don't have jobs, the hiring landscape has become more challenging in recent years. Excluding a two-month pandemic-related dip in 2020, US businesses are hiring at nearly the lowest rate since 2013, according to Bureau of Labor Statistics data.

In response to his job search struggles, Marconi is working part-time with a transportation company for a hotel chain and said he's taken steps to become a full-time insurance agent. He said he's grown frustrated with the application process — he recalled getting stood up at an interview — but is remaining optimistic while cutting back on unnecessary spending.

"I don't know when I'll retire because Social Security is not going to be enough," Marconi said, adding he's pickier about the roles he applies for. "My wife used to say I should do whatever increases my income, but I'm not going to work as an engineer making no money."

Working later in life for extra security

Some older Americans told BI that even though they could technically retire, they're holding out because they fear their savings and retirement income won't be sufficient if unexpected costs arise.

David F., 67, has been looking for work since last October — when he anticipated he would soon be laid off from his aerospace industry job. The layoff ultimately came in January.

Of the nearly 1,700 submitted applications he's tracked since beginning his job search, only 4% have yielded interviews, and none have amounted to a job offer yet. He said he's frequently encountered ghost jobs or positions with similar job descriptions to previous roles but significantly less pay.

"They're either looking for a unicorn and never finding it, or there's not really a position there, but they want to look like they're hiring," said David, who lives in Washington and asked to withhold his last name due to ongoing late-stage job interviews.

David doesn't have a firm retirement goal, but he hopes to retire within the next 5 to 10 years, assuming he finds a suitable position. After working in project management for nearly three decades, David briefly retired but returned to work to bolster his finances when the pandemic caused economic uncertainty. He said he's looking for work now because earning additional income would help him live more comfortably and stress less about retirement savings.

"My situation is not desperate, and although I've made mistakes in my retirement savings in the past, I'm not making those mistakes," David said.

David said he also wants to keep working to stay busy. He's among the older Americans who desire to keep working for reasons other than finances.

"There are the people that love their job, working or even volunteering," said Deb Whitman, AARP's chief public policy officer, adding, "There's sort of a social connection, a sense of purpose and meaning that people get."

Some older Americans' jobs are more crucial. While they hope to retire in the next few years, it's far from guaranteed.

In December 2022, David Schanen was laid off from his network engineer job. Over the last three years, he's struggled to find high-paying work in his industry.

"There's a lot of work for things that I'm qualified for, but people are paying like $25 an hour," said Schanen, who's 64 and based in Seattle. He said his network engineer job paid about $200,000 annually.

Schanen said he hopes to sell the two side businesses he started over the past decade and retire sometime in the next couple of years. However, he said his real estate photography and virtual concert businesses have only generated roughly $100,000 in combined revenues to date — not nearly enough to make his significant financial investments in them feel worthwhile.

Schanen's uncertain retirement outlook is why he's continued exploring other job opportunities. About six months ago, he began driving for Uber about 40 hours a week. He said he's frustrated with the gig's pay, but that it's given him the flexibility to control his own working hours and dedicate time to his businesses.

"Right now what I'm doing is just kind of keep helping me stay afloat," he said.

In 2023, not long after ChatGPT made generative AI mainstream, a poll on the anonymous workplace forum Blind asked, bluntly, whether young software engineers were "fucked." Some 42% of the more than 13,000 respondents picked the response "Yes? U guys are pretty much fucked."

This past October, Sundar Pichai proudly announced on an earnings call that AI was writing more than 25% of new code at Google. Mark Zuckerberg has said that Meta will build an AI engineer to write code. Salesforce CEO Marc Benioff announced a hiring freeze for engineers in 2025, saying AI had increased productivity by 30% — and then news broke that Salesforce planned to lay off 1,000 workers. (It's still hiring salespeople for AI-powered products.) Stripe intends to cut some engineers while also growing its overall head count this year.

All of this raises the question of what junior engineers will take on if some basic tasks become automated. Some product managers have speculated that AI will increasingly take on some technical coding tasks and circumvent their need for engineers. Overall, job postings for software engineers on Indeed are at a five-year low.

Are engineers really coding themselves into obsolescence?

AI is knocking down the career ladder by doing more of the coding work of entry-level engineers, but, at least for now, the increased coding output from AI is also increasing the demand for and value of experienced, creative developers to interpret and put the AI's work to good use.

While many obituaries have been written to mourn the death of coding, engineering is more than writing code: It requires creative thinking to solve problems and expertise to read code. As it is now, AI isn't an original thinker.

"AI can't support what it doesn't know," says James Stanger, the chief technology evangelist at CompTIA, a nonprofit trade association for the US IT industry. "I still don't think that it is something that can fully replace a good developer." He adds, though, that "if a developer is not creative, then you can replace them very easily."

oftware engineering has been around since the 1960s, but hiring boomed in the '90s with the dot-com era. Coding boot camps became common in the 2010s as the demand for engineers outpaced the supply. According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, 1.9 million people worked as software developers, quality-assurance analysts, and testers in 2023. The bureau projected that the industry would grow by 17% from 2023 to 2033, outpacing the national average of 4% for all jobs.

An analysis from CompTIA found that the rate of job postings for software engineers fell by 50% from January to December 2023, recovering slightly by the end of 2024. While posts for jobs across tech, finance and accounting, and marketing, communications, and creative roles all fell as well, the dip for software engineers was the sharpest. But CompTIA says the reason for the fall wasn't clear. Tech companies — including some that acknowledged overhiring during the pandemic — laid off thousands of workers in 2022 and 2023, with many citing economic uncertainty.

But there's a widening divide within software engineering regarding experience level. CompTIA found that the proportion of open software engineering roles seeking entry-level workers had dropped since January 2023, to just over 20% from nearly 30%, while job postings for those with seven years of experience or more increased to make up nearly 40% of the open roles, up from just over 30%.

The experienced engineers I talked to seemed confident that AI wouldn't come for the jobs anytime soon.

Jeremy Chua, a software engineer for the AI Lab at the venture firm Georgian, turns to chatbots when he hits issues with coding. He may prompt ChatGPT or Claude to cull answers from the depths of Google and Stack Overflow, a Q&A site for programmers, or to help him write in coding languages he's less fluent in. Chua, who has more than a decade of experience, says he was skeptical about whether gen AI could help him at work. He says that now he can sometimes complete projects that would have taken a week in a day or two, and he thinks of the chatbots he uses as coding partners. "It's not like it will replace me — it augments the way that I work," Chua tells me.

Caleb Tonkinson, an engineer at a clinical AI company called SmarterDx, tells me that AI is changing programming through two paths: "I can deliver the same thing faster, or I can deliver something better in the same period of time." He views AI as similar to other tech tools that became available to engineers — except more exciting as it advances rapidly. "There have been tons of tools for 20 years now" to debug software, generate code, or evaluate code, he says. "Your best companies and best software engineers are almost always leveraging those tools."

Cody Stewart, a principal software engineer at the software company CallRail, says he doesn't use gen AI for everything at work but might use it to get answers to "stupid questions" that he could spend a long time looking for on Google or Stack Overflow. He began using chatbots at work in 2022. "I read something that was like, you either learn to adopt new tools and figure out how they can enhance your day-to-day life and you stay with the times, or people are going to outlevel you," he said. "I saw that and thought I should probably give this a shot."

While more-experienced engineers are optimistic about AI, young engineers have more reason to worry.

The startup Cognition AI last year widely released an AI-powered software engineer called Devin, designed to work on bugs and small feature requests. In a December video, it described it as "a junior engineer" who "works best with a great manager." Cognition AI and its CEO, Scott Wu, did not respond to questions about whether it's meant to replace engineers or reduce the number the companies need.

Jayesh Govindarajan, a Salesforce executive vice president focused on AI, told my colleague Ana Altchek that the company was building "a system that can pretty much solve anything for you" but "just doesn't know what to solve," making knowing how to code less important. "I may be in the minority here," Govindarajan said, "but I think something that's far more essential than learning how to code is having agency."

Alexander Petros, a freelance open-source software engineer, is an AI holdout; he tells me he doesn't use generative AI to code. "I do worry that because AI is in many ways doing things that you used to hire junior developers to do, it does remove the ladder upon which junior developers would try to do those things, make those mistakes, and then learn," he says. Petros says he tried ChatGPT but found that the code could be clunky. If something in that code breaks, humans may not know how to fix it. "The process of producing code with LLMs, for the foreseeable future, is almost entirely distinct from the process of producing good software systems that last for a very long time," he says. Plus, using AI to solve problems means he may not learn how to get through those roadblocks on his own.

Chatbots lack creativity — that's where engineers, especially those who have been doing the job for a while, have an in-demand advantage. Stanger says he hopes companies use AI not as justification for cutting back on engineers but as a way to help them "get deeper into this code and get more creative."

Stanger says that treating engineers as a faucet that can be turned on and off as a business needs, or even replaced with AI, is likely to backfire in the long term. "If you've got toxic companies that are interested in that binge-and-purge, on-and-off hiring of developers, I'm not sure they're going to create very good products," he says.

People have long panicked that technology will take their livelihood. But even as automation eliminates some jobs, tech often creates a demand for new roles; most people today are working jobs that didn't exist before 1940.

The wholesale elimination of software engineers likely won't come to fruition in the near future, but the picture for more-experienced engineers is brighter. In the best-case scenario, AI will mean they get more time to flex their muscles and solve deep problems.

Amanda Hoover is a senior correspondent at Business Insider covering the tech industry. She writes about the biggest tech companies and trends.

Harsh comments arrived as new Captain America film flopped at box office

From awarding Rami Malek’s all-teeth performance as Freddie Mercury to Julianne Moore winning Best Actress for the wrong movie, the Oscars have always inspired confusion and frustration. Ahead of this year’s Academy Awards, Adam White explores the most egregious mistakes in recent Oscar history

Former FTX CEO tweeted for the first time in more than two years to address the Trump administration’s sweeping departmental cuts

The interval between the onset of symptoms and death has been 48 hours in the majority of cases