I remember being taught Model-driven development using Eclipse as part of the software engineering study back in the early 2000's. Even as a student it was painfully obvious that you'd spend an awful lot of time trying to work around annoying limitations in whatever tool was used, rather than just writing the code yourself. The parallel to vibe-coding seems rather obvious.

"No longer needed" is probably never going to happen, but IMO needed by fewer companies is inevitable. I see "vibe coding" as an extension to those website builders like Squarespace, definitely not suitable for a large website or a company whose entire business model is software and/or web based services, but good enough that the owner of a small, non-tech company who just happens to need a website or simple app can do it themselves instead of paying someone on Fiverr or something to do it. Unfortunately that means the options for new developers looking for easy experience building jobs that could eventually help them land a better paying position will be even more limited than it is now.

In order to replace programmers with vibe coding, stakeholders would need to be able to describe their requirements accurately.

Narrator: Programmers were never not needed.

What, no COBOL? No 5GL?

Still mad at Unreal Engine 5 for using visual scripting instead of a high level scripting language

Now, hold on a minute. I get what you're doing and I like it, but I don't think those first 2 examples work.

Visual programming is programming. Were they really ever touted as not requiring programmers? I would think it's just marketed as more intuitive and easier to use for certain applications, but users are still referred to as programmers. Let me know if I'm wrong. Side note: my first programming language was LabVIEW, a visual programming language, which I used in high school to program our robot for FRC. It is, for all intents and purposes, a fully-fledged programming language and requires a programmer to create code for it.

MDA, honestly I don't know much about it, but from the description in the image it sounds like it still requires someone to "write a universal model"... did they try to claim that that someone would not be a programmer?

But who programs the ai programs?

Like in pretty much all branches, the AI will eventually just be another tool. There still needs to be someone there to actually understand what the tool produces or it will result in catastrophees. You don't want to live in a building structurally designed by an AI without oversight nor fly in a plane programmed y an AI without oversight. Even for non-critical branches, there will be someone who directs the AI when it is e.g. composing the next shitty pop-song.