‘I include myself’: Why Sridhar Vembu warns coders should prepare for life after AI
“I don’t say this in panic, but with calm acceptance and embrace,” Vembu wrote on X, suggesting that the shift should be viewed as a structural change rather than a crisis.
- Feb 6, 2026,
- Updated Feb 6, 2026 2:32 PM IST
Zoho founder and former CEO Sridhar Vembu has sparked a wider debate on the future of software engineering after sharing his views on the rapidly accelerating capabilities of artificial intelligence in code development.
In a post reflecting on recent examples of AI-assisted programming, Vembu pointed to projects that underline how quickly the technology is advancing. Citing a Bhagwad Gita app built with AI assistance and Anthropic’s creation of an entire C compiler using its Claude AI, Vembu noted that such achievements were once considered complex, high-skill engineering feats.
“Examples are now pouring in about AI-assisted Code Engineering productivity,” he wrote, adding that building a full compiler is “not an easy engineering feat at all.”
Against this backdrop, Vembu issued a sobering message to professionals whose livelihoods depend on writing code. He said it may be time for software engineers to seriously consider alternative career paths — a group he explicitly includes himself in.
“I don’t say this in panic, but with calm acceptance and embrace,” Vembu wrote, suggesting that the shift should be viewed as a structural change rather than a crisis.
AI as an ‘economic philosopher’
Vembu also shared insights from an in-depth interaction with Google’s Gemini Pro, which he described as an experience akin to debating with “an extremely intelligent economic philosopher.” According to him, the AI not only offered a detailed view of how the economy might evolve in an AI-driven world but was also able to critique its own arguments effectively.
This self-reflective capability, Vembu implied, signals a deeper transformation in how humans may engage with technology — not just as tools, but as collaborators in reasoning and analysis.
Two diverging futures
Looking ahead, Vembu outlined two starkly different paths the AI revolution could take, depending largely on ownership and control of the technology.
In his optimistic vision, AI makes most forms of human technological prowess redundant, pushing technology into the background of everyday life — much like digital watches today. In such a world, he believes humans could redirect their energy toward more fundamental aspects of living, including family, nature, art, music, culture, sports, festivals and faith.
Vembu argued that this vision aligns best with small, close-knit rural communities. He said he already lives such a lifestyle and believes that if rural poverty can be addressed, it represents a deeply fulfilling way of life.
“The optimist in me thinks that this technology will make most technological prowess by humans redundant,” he wrote.
The alternative, more dystopian scenario, Vembu warned, is one of centralised control — where the ownership of AI systems enables rent-seeking and concentration of power, potentially exacerbating inequality and social fragmentation.
Vembu’s comments add to a growing chorus of tech leaders questioning long-held assumptions about job security, skill relevance and economic structure in an AI-first world. While much of the industry discourse has focused on productivity gains, his reflections push the conversation toward deeper societal and philosophical questions — particularly around purpose, community and the distribution of power.
Zoho founder and former CEO Sridhar Vembu has sparked a wider debate on the future of software engineering after sharing his views on the rapidly accelerating capabilities of artificial intelligence in code development.
In a post reflecting on recent examples of AI-assisted programming, Vembu pointed to projects that underline how quickly the technology is advancing. Citing a Bhagwad Gita app built with AI assistance and Anthropic’s creation of an entire C compiler using its Claude AI, Vembu noted that such achievements were once considered complex, high-skill engineering feats.
“Examples are now pouring in about AI-assisted Code Engineering productivity,” he wrote, adding that building a full compiler is “not an easy engineering feat at all.”
Against this backdrop, Vembu issued a sobering message to professionals whose livelihoods depend on writing code. He said it may be time for software engineers to seriously consider alternative career paths — a group he explicitly includes himself in.
“I don’t say this in panic, but with calm acceptance and embrace,” Vembu wrote, suggesting that the shift should be viewed as a structural change rather than a crisis.
AI as an ‘economic philosopher’
Vembu also shared insights from an in-depth interaction with Google’s Gemini Pro, which he described as an experience akin to debating with “an extremely intelligent economic philosopher.” According to him, the AI not only offered a detailed view of how the economy might evolve in an AI-driven world but was also able to critique its own arguments effectively.
This self-reflective capability, Vembu implied, signals a deeper transformation in how humans may engage with technology — not just as tools, but as collaborators in reasoning and analysis.
Two diverging futures
Looking ahead, Vembu outlined two starkly different paths the AI revolution could take, depending largely on ownership and control of the technology.
In his optimistic vision, AI makes most forms of human technological prowess redundant, pushing technology into the background of everyday life — much like digital watches today. In such a world, he believes humans could redirect their energy toward more fundamental aspects of living, including family, nature, art, music, culture, sports, festivals and faith.
Vembu argued that this vision aligns best with small, close-knit rural communities. He said he already lives such a lifestyle and believes that if rural poverty can be addressed, it represents a deeply fulfilling way of life.
“The optimist in me thinks that this technology will make most technological prowess by humans redundant,” he wrote.
The alternative, more dystopian scenario, Vembu warned, is one of centralised control — where the ownership of AI systems enables rent-seeking and concentration of power, potentially exacerbating inequality and social fragmentation.
Vembu’s comments add to a growing chorus of tech leaders questioning long-held assumptions about job security, skill relevance and economic structure in an AI-first world. While much of the industry discourse has focused on productivity gains, his reflections push the conversation toward deeper societal and philosophical questions — particularly around purpose, community and the distribution of power.