That’s nuts.

Were they not paid?

The author has completely misunderstood the advice to “not reinvent the wheel”. Or they’re just being needlessly literal in their interpretation.

If your job isn’t making wheels, then you use somebody else’s wheels when you need wheels, so long as those wheels do what you need them to do for a cost that is acceptable.

There is a high cost to reinventing things. So you don’t tend do so unless there is a compelling reason to do so.

If you’re just exploring and learning nobody will tell you not to.

That’s what you do when you’re operating in an authoritarian regime. You praise the dictator for their guidance and vision so you stay on their good side.

The thing is, they act like this isn’t happening already. My doctor frequently checks and monitors my blood sugar and has scheduled conversations with nutritionists to help me adjust my lifestyle and diet.

This is the fucking standard of care.

These quacks are just perpetuating the myth that doctors “just push meds” and are controlled by “big pharma”. It’s how conspiracy theories work. You take a small kernel of truth (we treat some diabetes with insulin) and then just make up sinister stories around it.

Edit: what they actually want is to ne able to blame people who have diabetes for having diabetes. That way they are justified in denying them life-saving medication.

Not not the onion.

I’m a big fan of both AI and automation but this is just 😬

Generally speaking I would avoid combining critical networking infrastructure with other services. Just from a reliability standpoint.

Let your router be just a router. Simple = reliable.

My dude, I very code other humans write. Do you think I’m not verifying code written by AI?

I highly recommend using AI. It’s much better than a Google search for most things.

The problem is that you really only see two sorts of articles.

AI is going to replace developers in 5 years!

AI sucks because it makes mistakes!

I actually see a lot more of the latter response on social media to the point where I’m developing a visceral response to the phrase “AI slop”.

Both stances are patently ridiculous though. AI cannot replace developers and it doesn’t need to be perfect to be useful. It turns out that it is a remarkably useful tool if you understand its limitations and use it in a reasonable way.

I’ll admit I skimmed most of that train wreak of an article - I think it’s pretty generous saying that it had a point. It’s mostly recounts of people complaining about AI. But if they hid something in there about it being remarkably useful in cases but not writing entire applications or features then I guess I’m on board?

Have you used AI to code? You don’t say “hey, write this file” and then commit it as “AI Bot 123 aibot@company.com”.

You start writing a method and get auto-completes that are sometimes helpful. Or you ask the bot to write out an algorithm. Or to copy something and modify it 30 times.

You’re not exactly keeping track of everything the bots did.

Oh did it? I hadn’t known it had difficult to open doors. Was it by design or just something to do with the gullwings?

You don’t tend to write a rule stating “passengers must be able to easily escape the vehicle in an emergency” until some tech bro makes it hard.

I’ve seen similar issues with ansible and terraform. It’s much better with more traditional languages though. Works great with core go-lang, Python, Java, Kotlin, etc. Ymmv when it comes to some libraries as well. I think it’s mostly to do with the amount of training data.

The execs are floating the idea that AI can be used to replace or supplement the people leaving.

I’ve been thinking about going into consulting. Companies like this are going to be a gold mine in a few years.

On the other hand, if you’re deathly allergic to something as common as onions, you probably shouldn’t rely on fast food workers to keep you alive.

If you’re serving food to the public you should probably be careful not to kill them.

I build my infrastructure with the terraform, Ansible and helm charts. The code is it’s own documentation as well as comments in that code explaining why I’ve done things if it’s not obvious.

Maybe a limited number of skips per hour or something.

Google fixes high severity Chrome flaw with public exploit

That’s some “fighting fire with fire” shit right there.