This is true not just for AI, but also adding more engineers to a project that isn’t going well. No matter resources you throw at it, you will continue to be slown down by the underlying problems with the team or company culture.
Its hilarious to me that before AI, I would suggest we refactor our code base to make it more readable and easier to understand and would get all the excuses. “Oh we don’t have the time”. " we could introduce bugs". “We would need to test that”
Now when I mention to make the code easier for an LLM to understand, they’re chomping at the bit for it.
Yeah… when the only documentation is CLAUDE.md…
Still you can see why right? Improving docs/understandability for AI is good for them - they get more capable AI. Improving it for humans only helps other people, which is less of a priority.
Before AI, refactoring was expensive, high risk, unclear payoff.
With AI, it’s cheap, higher risk, obvious payoff.
The obvious payoff being that engineers with an actual work ethic get to fix the mess.
I don’t care about work ethic, I want clean and tested code, that performs well and is easy to extend and replace
You get none of the above without someone willing to do the work.
definitely, I joined a company whose culture was toxic as hell. I didn’t regret leaving it
What is this website? Is it fully AI generated? It slorps the glorp hard tho. Fuck AI
Weird website.
I agree with the statement though.
But it would require employers to actually invest in their offices/workers. And possibly be more independent of whatever the shareholders dictate.
ha, nice pic
Haha, imagine. A business model that includes selling a product, to customers.
I prefer to sell customers
Why not both? Sell the products to the customers, then sell the customers to the other customers. It lets you double-dip for extra shareholder value!
