There’s a ridiculously simple test you can use to figure out whether AI mandates at a given company are well-considered, or are being shoved out the door by out-of-touch buffoons: What happens when an engineer documents that AI made a task worse? Are they taken seriously, or are they marginalized and eventually managed out?
Even easier test: is it an AI mandate?
If AI makes a task easier i find that engineers will use it. Engineers are lazy. We want to automate stuff so ee dont have to do it.
you’re the kind of programmer your colleagues hate having to deal with
Removed by mod
fuck almighty this is you
how in the fuck are AI fans always unabashedly like this
I guess it took two weeks for the committee that writes these posts to agree on the most banal trio of sentences to use here
christ it feels like too much credit if I call you mid
feel free to leave the rest of us behind, thanks
Engineers are a formally certified thing, you don’t get to call yourself an engineer because you make digital machines.
One of the certification requirements is ethical standards and education.
Ethics is not a part of my countries’ curriculum. They barely teach about the laws we broke when using software that doubles as hacking/spy software.
This document contains a lot of great stuff. I have a tremendous level of respect, both personal and professional, for Amazon’s Principal Engineering community; I’m led to understand that that respect may not be reciprocated, but that’s okay. I am, by their standards, a lapsed engineer who ran away to join the circus as one of its lesser clowns.
was there really a need to grovel
This article reads like it was AI generated.
huh???
