• Rcklsabndn@sh.itjust.works
    2·
    7 hours ago

    When I first started learning comp sci a decade ago all the old heads were like, Automate the Boring Stuff, and bragging that they’d written simple routines that did 90 percent of their job.

    The whole time I was thinking, ‘When middle management figures out your process you will be eliminated/replaced with an intern.’

    I got out of IT because a future of resetting email passwords/taking the fall for your team when there is inevitably a hack seemed like a stressful future.

  • nilloc@discuss.tchncs.deEnglish
    13·
    19 hours ago

    Needs a third panel with a tech bro telling investors that’s why his company is worth a trillion dollars.

  • WhiteRabbit_33@lemmy.world
    44·
    24 hours ago

    I feel like I’m too autistic for this shit. I’m an engineer and just send out the bullet points. Why are we wasting everyone’s time with this overly verbose garbage? What happened to celebrating brevity? Just give us the 24 hr work week and give up this farce.

    • VAK@lemmy.world
      3·
      12 hours ago

      I used to be like that but learnt that the literal meaning isn’t enough for some people, and an emotional impact needs to be created through prose. In general I still prefer brevity if it is very common phrases/jargon.

    • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.clubEnglish
      81·
      18 hours ago

      There is an idea among the neurotypicals that longer is better, in part because the academic environment rewards length. More words is more better.

      • Instigate@aussie.zone
        2·
        15 hours ago

        Not all academic environments reward length; psychology is quite the opposite where brevity and being concise are lauded. In my entire undergraduate psychology degree my longest maximum word-count for an assignment was 1500 words. Most were around 1000 words and a few were 700-800 words. Many people struggled with getting all the info they wanted into that space but I really thrived.

        • HobbitFoot @thelemmy.clubEnglish
          1·
          15 hours ago

          It isn’t a judgement of the science so much as of the education apparatus around the students. If you don’t have people able to grade papers on content, a lot grade papers on weight.

    • Xerxos@lemmy.ml
      6·
      18 hours ago

      I would like to do this, but many people want the fluff and sparkles.

      I have received compliments from coworkers about my AI slop, and I told them, “You know that I just feed a list of bullet points into an AI, right?”

      They were happy anyway. It will probably take some time before everyone gets over the ‘wonders’ of AI. Until that day, I give them what they want.

  • melsaskca@lemmy.ca
    110·
    1 day ago

    The joke is that the ten bullet points at the end are completely different from the ten bullet points that started it all.

  • ch00f@lemmy.world
    432·
    1 day ago

    Everyone boosting AI use acts like it’s this little secret that only they know about.

    • emb@lemmy.world
      161·
      1 day ago

      Yep. I think about it like having a time machine that could go back and change the future, or a printer that outputs perfect money dollars. Would be super useful, but only if somehow you alone, no one else, had the same technology. If everyone has it, it’s just chaos and everything sucks.

    • tempest@lemmy.ca
      71·
      1 day ago

      I use AI everyday for software development. It’s soul sucking and saps any satisfaction from completing anything but you can’t put the genie back in the lamp so here we are.

      I have had multiple discussions with non technical people who are on both sides of this image. They sit there talking about how it makes it easier to do the various parts of their job without irony. I just blink back thinking “you are describing a meat proxy”. If you are just copy pasting emails from one UI to another why do they need you?

      The anti AI people like to pretend that it’s ineffective but there are a large number of people in the middle of the org chart whose job is basically summarizing PowerPoints from below and then pass up. AI can definitely do that and even if it’s inefficient it’s fast and doesn’t need benefits and healthcare.

      Those people are going to get fucked.

    • NekoKoneko@lemmy.world
      41·
      1 day ago

      There are job “cheats” that are efficient - ways to save time that don’t affect work product.

      And then there are “cheats” that just push the work to someone else, because some people will gladly save five minutes for themselves even if it creates an hour of work for someone else.

      So yes, the latter people are the ones driving workplace AI adoption, as their “little productivity secret.”

  • belastend@lemmy.dbzer0.com
    5·
    22 hours ago

    I hate this so much. I have to read project applications and final reports for a living and in the past years this has become a very tedious endeavor. I recognize this shit after two paragraphs and it’s so annoying!