Did Edna Mode tell you that? She was correct.

Not all heroes wear capes.

Yeah I can’t deny that. Platforming bigots is not something an organization like the BBC should do. Reality has a left-leaning bias, and the BBC over-corrects.

It’s not my first choice, clearly, but it’s ok on some topics. Others I don’t even bother to read what they have said.

The Telegraph is outright terrible. The only more right wing paper is probably GB News.

I’d focus on using left or center-left publications like The Guardian and The Independent.

There are some further left publications such as Novara Media and The Canary (they’re better on some issues where others are too cowardly, like Gaza or trans rights). Though I’m not sure how accurate they are on everything.

On some issues the BBC is fine too, just not Israel and trans rights.

My point being, we are stopping pretty low if we reach for the Telegraph.

Let’s hope he goes through with it.

Can we have that in the UK too?

That’s true, but spaghetti code was always faster to write than good code before as well. I will agree that the speed gap probably has grown though. That’s why tools like AI need discipline.

If managers and engineers don’t understand that their code will turn into garbage and the business will get reputational harm and lose customers / get sued / have more tech debt to fix and they’ll eventually learn their lesson. In the meantime it’s going to be a painful process where upper management see extra speed, expand their scope or downsize their staff, then learn that they have crumbling foundations and need to adjust. This has publically happened a few times already. Things will stabilize in time.

Maybe you’ve misunderstood something.

No matter what framework or language you are using, AI can make the development process faster. It can help you debug a problem, write tests and refactor code. In some situations, it will be faster than writing code yourself, in others not.

Insane stuff.

Hopefully, those are the sorts of companies that should fail or get sued, so they learn their lesson. Not holding my breath though.

Companies have been doing insane shit for the sake of saving a buck or getting to market fast for decades, it’s nothing new. AI may or may not just make it worse.

In my experience, AI is an amplifier.

Good engineers will produce more good code, because they ask the right questions, know what good looks like and check the output.

Bad engineers will produce reams more bad code. The mistakes they make will be amplified. They will give wrong and incomplete instructions, won’t see what the problems are with the result and will ship it anyway.

This amplification also means people will spend a larger proportion of time reviewing than coding, which I think is less interesting.

All of this is stuff that can, to some extent, be addressed with policy. You help and instruct juniors, encourage people to better understand and own their code, or at worst reprimand them if they don’t.

You can adjust expectations of product managers and explain to them that more is not better, as it always has been. Faster development can often come with bugs and tech debt and this is more of the same.

All I’ve said above is puts aside the ethical arguments of using or not using AI of course. That’s a separate can of worms entirely.