I once watched a toddler pick up a smartphone and swipe like it was second nature. No instructions. No one taught him. He didn’t ask for help. He just, expected it to work.
That’s what happens with digital natives, kids growing up surrounded by devices, interfaces, and instant feedback. Tech becomes as natural as breathing.
Lately, I feel the same shift is happening in software.
The “1–3 Years” Job Description that reads like '5+ Years'
I was reading job descriptions for 1–3 year roles, and had to scroll back up to confirm it wasn’t senior. It’s no longer just: “know Java.”
Rather it was like:
Java + Spring Boot + Microservices + AWS + Docker + Kubernetes + CI/CD + System Design + Observability + Security basics + Strong DSA then call it 1–3 years, all for a “Junior” title.
Somewhere along the way, the market started expecting junior developers to arrive already sharpened.
AI didn’t just add tools. It changed the baseline.
Let’s be honest: AI changed the pace.
A developer with one year of experience today can:
- ship faster with copilots
- learn a new framework quickly (enough to build)
- generate boilerplate instantly
- get guided debugging help
- iterate at a speed that used to require mentorship
So the market sees higher output and says: “Then expectations should be higher.” But output and maturity aren’t the same thing.
Why this feels like the high expectations moment
Just like toddlers look unusually capable because the world is built around interactive screens, modern developers can look unusually “ready” because the environment is more supportive.
But engineering maturity still comes from real-world experience:
- production issues
- trade-offs
- debugging messy systems
- working with teams
- learning the cost of “quick fixes”
AI reduces friction.
It doesn’t compress responsibility.
The good side of this shift
New developers are coming in with:
- multiple programming languages already touched
- better awareness of best practices early
- DSA as a default subject
- confidence to ship and experiment
That’s not bad. That’s evolution.
The dark side: inflated expectations, invisible pressure
The problem starts when companies treat AI as a reason to demand:
- senior-level readiness
- without senior-level mentorship
- and without senior-level pay
When the bar rises but support doesn’t.
The result? Many good developers start feeling behind, even when they’re growing fast.
For hiring teams
If you want junior roles to produce senior output, then you can’t offer junior support.
If you want Senior output, you need to provide Senior support.
That means:
- better onboarding
- clear role expectations
- real mentorship
- practical interviews
- job descriptions that reflect the actual work (not a wishlist)
When you ask for “1–3 years experience” but expect “5 years maturity,” you don’t just filter candidates, you distort the entire market.
Ending thought
We often mistake exposure for superiority.
Kids using smart devices aren’t “better.” They’re born into a different environment.
Developers aren’t “weaker” or “stronger.”
We’re building in a world where tools change faster than job expectations can be updated responsibly.
Yes, developers are arriving more “enlightened” than before.
But maturity still takes time.
And no amount of AI can replace that.
Question for engineering managers / leads
Are you seeing “Junior” candidates who code like Seniors but debug like Juniors? How do you bridge that gap?