Live data from Hacker News

Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

karimjedda.com

21–30 of 217 posts

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#21
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I closed the tab after seeing the AI hero image. Good to know I didn't miss anything.

Reading the domain-name had the same effect for me.

You discount people's blogs based on them having a non-western name? Maybe I've misunderstood your comment, but the domain is just their name.

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#22
What is the right, best software organization in the current era of AI coding? This question is critical and wholly unanswered in comprehensive research along the same axis as Accelerate (2018, Forsgren, Humble, Kim).

There are a lot of (excruciatingly) long-form posts about what folks are pioneering but not a whole lot of follow up about what failed. Where are the short posts on the negative space? How did halving your staff work out? Flattening your org? All those dark factories, what haven't they produced? How about all the other things tried, failed, and unceremoniously scrapped?

We need to explore and communicate the negative space more efficiently. Don't repeat the same mistakes, and don't make me read 2653 words when 300 do it better.

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#23
post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I closed the tab after seeing the AI hero image. Good to know I didn't miss anything.

Reading the domain-name had the same effect for me.

I can't change my name, but happy to change the hero picture :))

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#25
post #20

> Gemini 4 helped with the editing. Does this guy have access to Gemini 4 already? I'm guessing Gemma 4 was happy to be mistaken for Gemini and didn't catch this mistake.

“Helping” is doing some heavy lifting in that sentence! It appears to be 100% AI.

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Well it contains a typo, so it made a cock up.

More than that, the AI disclaimer itself is a hallucination: > Gemini 4 helped with the editing. There is no Gemini 4, unless the author is writing from the future.

You are correct, my bad. I meant to write Gemma 4. I'll update.

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#28
post #20

> Gemini 4 helped with the editing. Does this guy have access to Gemini 4 already? I'm guessing Gemma 4 was happy to be mistaken for Gemini and didn't catch this mistake.

Yes correct, Gemma. Will correct it shortly.

You don't build credibility by putting out slop and correcting it every time someone points out that it's wrong. You think it's our job to proofread and fact-check?

Re: Engineering management after the cost of code collapsed

#29
Code was very rarely the bottleneck in the first place.

If programmer productivity was something we actively optimized for, we wouldn't have crammed programmers like sardines in warm and noisy open floor offices with 2000 ppm CO2 levels and then further constantly interrupt them with emails and slack pings and meetings all day long, Jira rigmarole wouldn't make up a significant portion of what they did, programmers would have instead mostly been thinking and programming.

We've always had the ability to 2X if not 10X the output of each and every one of those poor souls. You don't end with this sort of programming purgatory because it's a productivity optimum, it very clearly isn't, but because it's a billable hours optimum and/or an org chart clout optimum and/or because of Jevons paradox got hands even in business management and the IT department was allocated too many dollars.

Post reply on HN