• Nate Cox@programming.dev
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    27
    ·
    13 days ago

    The goalpost escalation I constantly see in these threads is both hilarious and deeply frustrating.

    “You need to be a good dev to use these!” “I am a good dev and these tools suck.”

    “No like you need to be enterprise level good” “I am an enterprise level dev with credentials far exceeding the baseline offered.”

    “No but you need to have written code recently!!” “I was writing code yesterday.”

    I am now waiting for the obligatory “well your coworkers must just be fixing all your code you screw up” because the pro-ai crowd has no argument for the tech not based on “u suk”.

    • onlinepersona@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      arrow-down
      5
      ·
      12 days ago

      I’m not pro AI or anti AI. I am anti big tech though, which makes the discussion more complicated.

      Regarding escalation, a non coding team lead isn’t a dev. A CTO isn’t a dev. A software architect isn’t a dev. A software developer is a dev. That’s not an escalation, it’s a fact.

      Just because you lead a team of devs, doesn’t mean you are a software developer, you could’ve gone to business school, never written a line of code and just started leading a team of software developers because you learned “how to lead”. And there are different kinds of team leads, those that get their hands dirty and those that don’t.

      So no, being a CTO, CEO, or whatever C you want to put in front of your title doesn’t make you “far exceed” any qualification. I actually think that kind of thinking is the problem workers are underpaid: people who lead actually often exceedingly overestimate their abilities in the craft they lead. “I lead a team of athletes, that means I’m a good athlete”. Do you understand how crazy that sounds?