41–50 of 74 posts
Thankfully they added that horrible AIslop image right in the beginning of the article, so I knew instantly to not trust the author on anything.
Well, Nate Glubish seems to be the Minister of Technology and Innovation of Alberta.
This is really awesome work. Solving these legacy IT problems in government is under appreciated. Love that you all were able to accomplish this. Super disappointed to see most of the comments just complaining about AI and not engaging with the contents of the article.
Great idea, and hopefully great results. But it’s written like LinkedIn “broetry” and that AI image at the top promises a fluffy article. Maybe expand a bit on some of the impressive tech described in the body?
The tech isn't the big news. It's the process opportunity for governments. That said, I did really like what they reported on a use case of Gemini -- they got a bunch of people to video every single process in the old systems, and then got Gemini to watch the video and write full specs for the new systems. Niiice. What you have in civil government is a lot of people and a lot of time -- turning that into inputs for a…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I’m at the point where if I see an AI image at the start of an article I just back right out. It would be so much better if the author just didn’t include an image at all. What did this image actually add to the content of the post? If you’re just doing something for the sake of doing it you’ve lost the plot.
An image signals that the author put time and energy into the article and that they have an eye for detail. Even if it's an AI generated image because the author still had to pick a fitting image.
There is no reality on this planet where this project costs $54M and 4 years. Good on the folks in the ministry to notice this and not blindly follow implement.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
On the one hand, yes. On the other, procurement is so broken, that if their inhouse team is only marginally better, it's a win.
> procurement is so broken Anecdata: while i was in a tiny tiny software company, we got an in at a large auto manufacturer. They said they had been trying to get someone to do that job for like 2 years. The job was of the 'two people 3 months' magnitude. The procurement system was also of the 'two people 3 months' magnitude so we simply gave up. In the article's case, they could have done this even before coding ass…
> They understand the business processes they’re digitizing. I feel this has more importance than they think. Outside consultants would not have had this domain knowledge and would have spent months learning it. And then would have had to fix their mistakes because they misunderstood something (billed to the province, naturally)
Writing quality was distracting. Very breathey. Hard to understand if I was getting important information or not -- but it's ok, some people will defend this style.
You can look at a histogram of number of words per sentence, and you'll find immediately that it's written by an AI. When? Today. Minutes. Four years. $54 million. Collect feedback. Delivered faster. Not days. Not weeks. It's free. ... No $19 million in upfront costs. They're now doing meaningful work. Let me put that in context. That's a 95% cost reduction. But think about what that represents. And we can show you h…
> They understand the business processes they’re digitizing. I feel this has more importance than they think. Outside consultants would not have had this domain knowledge and would have spent months learning it. And then would have had to fix their mistakes because they misunderstood something (billed to the province, naturally)
It really does make us punch above our weight. We can ask important questions and identify critical issues early in development of new things.