When requirements are “Whatever” then by all means use the “Whatever” machine: https://eev.ee/blog/2025/07/03/the-rise-of-whatever/
And then look for a better gig because such an environment is going to be toxic to your skill set. The more exacting the shop, the better they pay.
Literally the opposite experience when I helped material scientists with their R&D. Breaking in production would mean people who get paid 2x more than me are suddenly unable to do their job. But then again, our requirements made sense because we would literally look at a manual process to automate with the engineers. What you describe sounds like hell to me. There are greener pastures.
The stock market makes no sense to me.
That’s because “The market can remain irrational longer than you can remain solvent.”
Maybe it is because I started out in QA, but I have to strongly disagree. You should assume the code doesn’t work until proven otherwise, AI or not. Then when it doesn’t work I find it is easier to debug you own code than someone else’s and that includes AI.
Why would you ever yell at an employee unless you’re bad at managing people? And you think you can manage an LLM better because it doesn’t complain when you’re obviously wrong?
A junior developer actually learns from doing the job, an LLM only learns when they update the training corpus and develop an updated model.
It’s usually vastly easier to verify an answer than posit one, if you have the patience to do so.
I usually write 3x the code to test the code itself. Verification is often harder than implementation.
DOGE has entered the chat
When LLMs get it right it’s because they’re summarizing a stack overflow or GitHub snippet it was trained on. But you loose all the benefits of other humans commenting on the context, pitfalls and other alternatives.
Pepper Ridge Farms remembers when you could just do a web search and get it answered in the first couple results. Then the SEO wars happened…
I call it colonial trauma. Our forefathers would rape the help and the worse that would happen is getting berated by the judge.
As we say in the USA:
“The police don’t protect us, we protect us”
But no one should buy the premise here, because it is so ugly. That premise is that people have fixed racial identities, and these categories are strict. The most disturbing line in the article is this righteous bit—“asked if any of his family had intermarried while in East Africa, he said in the interview on Thursday, ‘They’re all of Indian origin, from Gujarat.’”
Just a damn good point that race is not set in stone but dynamic. Haven’t seen this point until now.
Padme: you are going to release the video footage, right?
Reminds me of an adage:
It takes two to lie: one to lie, and one to listen
That would mean admitting they did something wrong, which is impossible for these ghouls.
Wish they’d pray for forgiveness because then that would mean admitting mistakes.
3% of the population being scammers sounds about right.
I struggled with passive wording until I learned certain tells like my use of the word “would”. Once you learn what words to look out for you start to actively reword things as you write them. Asking AI to rework your passive tone isn’t going to rewire your brain to write better.
Don’t bother with this guy, @ArbitraryValue@sh.itjust.works has done some mental gymnastics to justify starving the Palestinian population. So it really isn’t surprising they would want to vote for the most ghoulish option.