Other than maybe a few very rote, boilerplate types of development, all this shit about replacing coders is almost entirely noise made by either the wishful thinking of oligarchs or credulous repetition of that wishful thinking by clueless journalists.
But it’s still a pretty rough time to be just getting into tech, just because of the state of the job market.
Lambda is certainly an interesting case for this, I’ll give you that. Outside of that, though, the impact on deployment speed is also not relevant; the bottlenecks for deployment are things like CI, canarying, even rolling blackout windows across AZs, etc. The actual time spent transmitting your build artifact over the network is completely negligible even at huge sizes
The size of the code is mostly irrelevant if you’re not shipping it to clients over the network on every request. Short of truly gargantuan statically-linked binaries in compiled languages, anyway, and bundling isn’t really an applicable concept there. And similarly, the overhead of loading modules from the filesystem is a one-time cost that’s mostly irrelevant for server-side code that runs for days or weeks or years at a time.
On the other hand, the complexity overhead of adding the additional bundling step is a major drag on development productivity, debuggability, etc.
Why would anyone stop using those standards? You seem very confused about the incentives for adopting standards. Sure, maybe US-driven standards were chosen over other possibilities partly because of political environment, but once you have a perfectly good standard adopted you’re not just going to throw it out because the original author isn’t cool anymore. You don’t need a dominant power to adopt standards.
And for being “slightly political” and “focused on the standards,” your post sure does spend the majority of its time talking about only politics and not about standards at all