According to Statista, there are roughly 28.7 million software developers in the world today. If we use the Pareto principle, I'm confident that less than 100 of those 28.7 million developers contributed to 80% of the code that is in use today.
So what would happen if all of these developers started striking in 2024?
Immediate Disruptions
A strike by software developers would result in immediate and tangible disruptions across various sectors. Most directly, the tech industry that relies on developers for product development, updates, and maintenance would face significant operational and financial losses.
Economic Impact
A prolonged developers' strike could, therefore, have a domino effect, disrupting supply chains, financial markets, and even critical infrastructure like the Internet. This could potentially lead to tech giants like Google, Facebook, Amazon, Netflix, and Microsoft going bankrupt.
Innovation and Competition
In the medium to long term, a strike could significantly impact the pace of innovation. The delay in the development of new technologies and the potential loss of momentum in research and development initiatives could slow down the introduction of breakthrough innovations.
Perhaps the most profound impact of a developer's strike would prompt society to reflect on our reliance on technology and the individuals who build it.
To be honest with you, none of these guys are among the top 1% richest people in the world. So why don't you start paying us... 😉
Top comments (13)
If we can't agree on tabs vs spaces I'm not sure how good we are at collective action
I want to add a thing that there are so many things which is better than striking.
1.> We need to fix the market price for our products or service.
2.> The calculations for calculating the budget of our product or service.
3.> We need to understand the value of our work also and set the budget according to it.
*4.> Because by our single service or product the business will last for long. I also thought there must be a loyalty system also, we need to discuss these points further with our whole community.
*
Thankyou
If this is true, then they (the 100) will be working a lot of ChatGPT and Co-pilot-assisted overtime, while the strikers starve (I don't see that elite group joining the strikers).
Sadly, I believe the opposite would be true. A striker is not on the payroll while striking, so those companies' costs plummet. Not only that, but it provides them with the perfect excuse to further excise their workforce. Combine that with a few share buybacks (a practice, by the way, which I believe should be outlawed), and you have created a few trillionaires !
If politicians grew spines, and actually legislated for the benefit of their constituents, instead of for their very rich donors or masters, then perhaps socially beneficial (in the workforce and elsewhere) change might be effected.
An entertaining, inventive, article, by the way, intended, as I interpret it, to be humorous. Thank you for that.
Regrettably, I find the subject matter quite serious, and find it difficult to laugh when I see the trajectory in which our world is headed.
Thank you for the article. I would say that developers need to learn Chatgpt and similar AI's weaknesses, or learn to work along with the AI. If you build a business that supports or encourages AI on the platform then you cover your vulnerability and won't get left behind. Since everything is moving that direction a one-time-strike isn't going to solve the problem. It may yield temporary gains but inevitably won't put a dent in the problem. But if AGI comes on the scene, don't worry, we'll probably all be suffering together at least. :-)
Two things:
First - good work on writing an article maybe you haven’t written an article for a long time and getting this done must have been an achievement.
Second - You are abusing the 80/20 rule. This rule states only 20% of what we do in a day leads to 80% of result. Do not apply 80/20 rule to anything and everything.
Anyways - the math is wrong. You figure out what’s 20% off 28 million. I am confident it’s not hundred. You can’t simply say if we use Pareto principal then only 20% of what human body consist of leads to 80% of entire human functioning. You also can’t say only 20% of the components used in MacBook leads to 80% of its entire functioning.
Good luck for future articles.
Well-structured
The main cause is Economic Impact l think
Wait why are software engineers striking?
"I'm confident that less than 100 of those 28.7 million developers contributed to 80%" - This is insane. At least 20% of the code in-use today was written by developers who aren't even alive anymore. I'm looking at you COBOL, Banks and Insurance Companies.
Sadly, one thing is left out. While I appreciate the thought experiment, a lot of us work remotely and will be more than happy to step in and earn mega bucks coding for those they think they have any type of leverage.
I've done scab work before, the pay is amazing. Long hours, but I'll do it for a month or two.
I owe nothing to anyone striking, if they don't want their job, I'll take it if the pay is right. And secure my ability to get employed for the rest of my life.
You’re proud to be a scab lol
It's an excellent question to ponder upon, but probably highly unlikely. Even if everyone agrees, there will be people who switch immediately for the money due to the skew in supply and demand.
Thats a negative thought.
Okay, but ... why are we striking? (And, to be clear, I'm not striking with you.)