honestly, the more we hire more people, the more I get it
we used to only hire quality people. we were picky. small company, so everybody there needed to be a contributor. now we just hire to have bodies in chairs and they’re noticeably less capable, and half of them sound like AI themselves.
fuck, I worked with one guy that would actually say “yes, you’re right, I was wrong about xyz, it should actually be abc” when you prodded three levels deep to find out how a dumb fuck up happened
my point is, some of these people absolutely could be replaced by AI and it would have less if an impact than my original estimations
I worked with one guy that would actually say “yes, you’re right, I was wrong about xyz, it should actually be abc”
I think this is what I hate most about rampant LLMs unleashed on the general populace. That kinda phrasing used to just be “effective communication when owning a mistake.” But now, like the emdash — (lol), it’s abused into a cliche as telltale clanker-speak.
It erodes trust that, whether right or wrong, you’re speaking to an authentic human being.
My biggest peeve is their constant use of “That’s not (anything here), that’s positive thing.” Lol
I actually did think about taking that out, because I agree, that should be effective communication and I say similar things myself. I don’t know how to explain it right now but the way that he said it was exactly like talking to AI, whereas the way I phrase it is more natural. I got two separate opinions on the matter with multiple examples from both myself and the AI bot guy lmfao, and they both agreed that I sounded like a person and the other guy sounded like a bot
SWE saw the same arc and now were at Andy Yen saying that a humans job isn’t to use LLMs to write good code. It’s to help LLMs so they can write good code.
That’s what’s coming down the pipeline for, quite literally, every single knowledge worker unless something is done.
honestly, the more we hire more people, the more I get it
we used to only hire quality people. we were picky. small company, so everybody there needed to be a contributor. now we just hire to have bodies in chairs and they’re noticeably less capable, and half of them sound like AI themselves.
fuck, I worked with one guy that would actually say “yes, you’re right, I was wrong about xyz, it should actually be abc” when you prodded three levels deep to find out how a dumb fuck up happened
my point is, some of these people absolutely could be replaced by AI and it would have less if an impact than my original estimations
I think this is what I hate most about rampant LLMs unleashed on the general populace. That kinda phrasing used to just be “effective communication when owning a mistake.” But now, like the emdash — (lol), it’s abused into a cliche as telltale clanker-speak.
It erodes trust that, whether right or wrong, you’re speaking to an authentic human being.
My biggest peeve is their constant use of “That’s not (anything here), that’s positive thing.” Lol
I actually did think about taking that out, because I agree, that should be effective communication and I say similar things myself. I don’t know how to explain it right now but the way that he said it was exactly like talking to AI, whereas the way I phrase it is more natural. I got two separate opinions on the matter with multiple examples from both myself and the AI bot guy lmfao, and they both agreed that I sounded like a person and the other guy sounded like a bot
SWE saw the same arc and now were at Andy Yen saying that a humans job isn’t to use LLMs to write good code. It’s to help LLMs so they can write good code.
That’s what’s coming down the pipeline for, quite literally, every single knowledge worker unless something is done.