Feels like software security knowledge will probably remain relevant for a while too. It's all well and good getting an LLM to code the system, but without any idea of what exploits are being used against that language/framework/software as a whole, you're almost certainly going to get hacked at some point or another.
But to be honest, I'd also programming in general will still matter in 10 years, especially for more niche domains. Yes, stuff like Claude can throw together apps and programs in JavaScript or PHP or Python, but they don't have training material for every language or domain. If you're not working as a web developer, then things probably aren't going to change as much as you think they will...
This is a very long-winded way of saying gatekeepers gonna gatekeep.
Anyone can do programming. That's not really that impressive.
Writing/organizing/evolving software so it scales along with the organization (note: not speaking about performance here) is super important.
How will the software be built/maintained/deployed when there are dozens of orgs, each with dozens of teams and sub-teams?
You're completely right, but just because anyone can doesn't mean it's unimpressive. (It does make it 'not valuable').
It's like cooking. Anyone can do it. Lots of people do. Some (maybe the majority if you include men and children) never learned how. A home cook can be exceptional but apart from the obvious (feeding the family) it's a skill that is hard learned with little value.
Of course frozen meals were designed to replace home cooking decades ago (hint; that never happened. ) And just because people can cook, doesn't mean they can (or should) open a restaurant. (The restaurant business is only lightly dependent on cooking.)
The analogy holds in programming. A good programmer is impressive for getting on the ladder. But making it in the software world requires lots of non-programing skills.
Put another way, yes programing is impressive (looking from below) but is only one step on a tall ladder. As you say, there's design, development, architecture, documentation, communication, refinement - all critical to a product's ultimate success.
AI is on the first rung of the ladder. And in many ways thats a very impressive step. And maybe it'll climb a bit higher. But looking down, it has a long long way to go before it replaces me :)
However I can't see why AI won't be able to do it given enough training data, and given that the problem is not too esoteric. After all it's just problem solving in another form.
Measuring things. For example determining performance harms and improvements from new features or determining trend shifts during a defined duration.
Accessibility, security, transmission, and operations.
Requirements analysis.
Visual design, user experience, and information architecture. I mean actual product design and not just using a tool/framework to put text on screen.
High level languages, debuggers, etc... are all tools to aid in matching your impedance to that of the computer, etc.
Requirements gathering. System Analysis. System Design. Engineering.
Will all matter the same as they do now.
But after the AIpocalypse, it's only the not-yet-sentient sprinklers that will still be willing to water our few remaining crops and feed us.
And let's say AI does all the programming for us, but engineers are there to know what can be programmed and what couldn't. Engineers are there to prevent business from trying to make flying submarines.
Basically engineers are the girl in front of the computer who can answer this question: https://xkcd.com/1425/