Hearing Julie Zhuo — of “The Making of a Manager” — say on Lenny’s podcast that we should call ourselves/have more “builders” instead of the many roles we have, and with Lenny agreeing… it warmed my heart.

I’ve always seen product, design and tech more as disciplines than as a role, and now with GenAI that’s even more true. When I talked with startups, I used to say I could help with a bit of everything, but much more with product. Does that mean it’s over for specific roles? No.

The point is that being a “duck” (a jack of all trades) makes even more sense with GenAI helping with the specifics. Still, I keep saying I wouldn’t put code into production without a review from someone technical on projects that are already running. Honestly, this can be solved by a mature deploy process in the company, with technical reviews and a good pipeline.

On the other hand, I see more junior positions “disappearing”, but I haven’t done any research; it’s just from conversations and news. News like this Bloomberg piece, which could have been better written but makes the point. I really believe it has more to do with companies not knowing what to do with the present than with these younger people not being able to shine in the AI economy. Mainly because of their flexibility and low resistance to change, since they don’t know the “old way”.

I have a hypothesis and I’ll test it soon in GenAI and AI automation projects. Younger people can deliver incredible projects when amplified by AI, and more senior people focus on guiding and reviewing what’s being done.

I’m quite excited about what (some) people delivered in my courses. Let’s see where this hypothesis goes.

Originally written in Portuguese and published on LinkedIn on September 22, 2025. I translated it into English with the help of AI (Claude): it let me bring my LinkedIn posts to people who don’t read Portuguese without rewriting each one from scratch. I reviewed the translation to keep my original meaning and tone.