851–860 of 880 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
My non technical wife asked ai to brush up the photo for her cv. Ai did that with whatever cli tools were available and what it would write itself. Ai is not a faster horse. It is a phase shift. We won't see a gas station clerk write photoshop because we won't need a photoshop.
I'm not sure how happy is a recruiter to see an ai photo in cv. Although they don't read cv themselves these days
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Will it ever stop, though? I mean, why even try if social mobility has been destroyed? If we're the permanent underclass now, then there's no point in struggling against any of this.
The class consciousness from middle class lately has been funny to me. We always had poor people that were "permanent underclass" and middle class didn't care. They were not afraid of revolution or whatever we are afraid now. If the bad scenario happens and 99% of the people becomes irrelevant to the economy, everybody will live their life's worried about basic necessities and smart hardworking people will be richer…
I don't believe this at all. Social mobility definitely existed. It was at least possible to educate oneself and rise in society. Maybe the effort required wasn't equal for everybody, but it sure as hell wasn't impossible, because I've personally seen it happen.
That is fundamentally different from this supposedly K shaped economy world where it is literally impossible to rise. Education and talent don't matter anymore. It looks like the possible futures are either a post scarcity society or a cyberpunk dystopia.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> This is the worst LLMs will ever be. Not outsourcing critical thinking to LLM will be seen as a liability in the not so distant future. Just a year or two ago almost no one even took LLM seriously for coding. Now the status quo has moved for also critical thinking, and we hear comments like this. LLM's chances of making a mistake will be orders of magnitude lowers than humans. Slowly learn to let the wheel go. AI w…
We're moving toward a future where intellectual workers are, indeed, fucked. At least intellectual work will be the first real casualty. I'm not AI maximalist. But with how things have progressed the past 4-5 years, I'm more confident on the above being true, than not. I don't think intellectual work will drop off overnight. There will be a long period, perhaps decade or two, where many jobs will just gradually disap…
What I'm sick of is this passive acceptance of technological determinism. Why build a technology that's so corrosive and so destructive to so many? You've got powerful people talking about creating a permanent underclass, and happily charging forward anyway. AI is literally the most anti-human thing ever, and should be opposed politically.
But there's been so much indoctrination it will be very difficult. For instance, software engineers were so fucking smug for decades, foolishly adopting libertarian ideas while imagining themselves to be capitalists. We resisted any efforts towards unionization to create translate our (former) economic power into political power. Now we're literally the first on the chopping block.
In the words of Admiral Ackbar, "It's a trap". Any apparent short term gain is really a prescription for long term pain. Ignore what AI fanboys say and instead look at what they do. https://northeasttimes.com/2026/08/07/oracle-bans-ai-code-fr...
Is it long term pain if a small startup in a very competitive vertical gets to market quicker with code gen and finds market fit? Whether that results in a rewrite or a refactor, that is still a huge win and one that a lot of people will gamble on.
Yes.
Whether any gain is worth the pain is left as an exercise for the user.
> bad engineers were always a liability This part of the article hits home for me. With AI, "bad" engineers can now amplify their "bad" engineering x10 across the organization. The most egregious of these cases for me is often long tenured engineers who have lost interest in the craft, creating a dangerous combination of having enough merit to ship but not enough interest to make what they ship _good_. I am still a f…
Which is an incentive problem, they have likely reached an equilibrium with their company. Genuinely few companies provide any incentive and critically, the space, to ship good code.
Because frankly it doesn't matter in the middle grounds. Which is where 90% of developers are.
I wish we all had fulfilling edge of our seat projects to work on, that challenged us just right, mattered to our community etc. AI is absolutely poised to disrupt the middle 80% of development because the middle 80% of dev is not that important or hard.
It's just a shame for all of us who loved the craft, and didn't mind being in the middle making a living. That's a totally noble place to be, and it could get taken away from many of us.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You might be surprised at how incompetent some engineers are. They get filtered out with the leetcode test. Of course, it doesn't filter them all out, and that's why there's a followup interview round.
I have given dozens of interviews at big companies and small companies and medium companies so I am not speaking out of my ass. These leetcode tests are not good filters, nothing is “surprising” me. Generally they are just wanky bullshit from some middle manager’s slightly-incorrect recollection of their first “data structures and algorithms” class, and the solution is almost invariably “use a hashmap” or “use a minh…
The best interview method I've seen is getting the candidate to work for a day or two alongside the team. The second-best was picking a bug from the current repo and working it out together with the candidate, getting them (or in this case, me) to work out why the bug was happening, work out a solution, code up the solution, and commit it back to the repo as a PR.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Such test filter out the obvious frauds. if you need garbage like leetcode to filter out "obvious frauds" you got a whole lot of problems in your company/team/...
A colleague of mine came to me for advice. He wanted one of those high dollar jobs at a well-known MegaCorp. He knew a leetcode test was used by them. I suggested that his top priority was to study the leetcode books for the next 3 weeks. I told him those three weeks would be the best ROI he'd ever make. He did so. He aced the test. He got the job with a huge offer. He agreed that the ROI was out of the park! P.S. I'…
Your friend would have spent three weeks practicing their sketching, right? And they would have made a decent drawing at the interview. And that would have the exact same ROI as spending those weeks on practicing leetcode.
The point is not that studying leetcode is good ROI. The point is that large orgs are testing for something that isn't relevant to commercial coding.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> The whole "learn to code" and software bootcamp craze always baffled me. Why? While the rest of your comment explains why the plan failed, it seems like it should be pretty obvious why business would try to attract an increased supply. Hint: It puts downward pressure on price. Same reason they are trying again with AI. > every other job I can think of at a similar salary level has entrance requirements ' Yes, the a…
> Hint: It puts downward pressure on price. Same reason they are trying again with AI. You say it like it's a bad thing. About occupational licensing for software: it's also a uniquely global market, so I'm not sure how any one economy moving ahead with occupational licensing would work, unless they also restricted what software you can import or use in the cloud.
What to you suggests it is said as a bad thing? It reads neutrally to me.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
There is a world of difference between using it as a "peer architect" and outsourcing your entire thought process to it.
You're treating asking questions on everything as "outsourcing your entire thinking". It isn't.
Sorry mate, but if that isn't outsourcing one's thinking then we live in different realities.