undefined | Better HN

0 pointsdgxyz6d ago0 comments

This wasn't really forced on us.

The whole industry is like a fashion show and has been for a long time. This is just exceptionally stupid compared to moderately stupid things before. I see it ore that everyone's wearing pink feathered chicken suits because it's in fashion. If you don't wear a pink feathered chicken suit then you're a luddite scumbag who doesn't deserve the respect of your peers.

However some of us still have enough self-respect not to be seen dead in a pink feathered chicken suit. I mean I'm still pissed off at half the other stuff we do in the industry. I haven't even really looked at the chicken suits yet.

0 comments

piva006d ago

If you work in a tech company with >5k employees it's extremely likely it's been forced down on you to wear the pink feathered chicken suit, and told to not complain about the pink feathered chicken suit because it is the inevitable future, and no one will be wearing anything that doesn't look like it ever again. Also, we are watching every straggler not in a pink feathered chicken suit, put yours on or leave the building.

dgxyzOP6d ago

If enough people say no, it'll stop.

For ref I'm usually the guy who comes in and cleans up all the chicken corpses after.

pdimitar6d ago

I don't know what is so mysterious about the following:

People can't just leave Wednesday and be in a new job with the same or better pay next Monday.

Rent/mortgage, bills and food are still due.

Comments like yours always baffle me. Empty idealism.

For the record, I usually get called to clean up and make things good again as well. Most of my career was like that.

1 more reply

piva005d ago

Enough people could say no and take a stance if there was collective solidarity in the tech industry. Unfortunately we don't have that, tech workers are in the vast majority skeptical of or anti anything resembling unionised work. The bosses won on that front, and now they can dictate freely that you must wear the pink feathered chicken suit.

People, in general, want to keep their jobs, saying no is an option when you don't care what happens with it or have the backing of the collective to walk out together.

gosub1006d ago

my assessment of the situation: "we've spent so much money on AI's promise to give us 5x, 10x returns, that now we have to earn it back by foisting the burden on developers to make up the gains by working harder, at least enough to recoup the exec's decision to pour money into the boondoggle".

"Hey developers, we spent $x million on Claude, who promised 7x returns, so YOU better make it 7x more efficient so we don't look bad".

andrekandre6d ago

yea the real frightening thing about this is, if there is a clear failure to get roi on this stuff, the top-level people will be very reticent to walk it all back and admit it was a royal fuckup

quantified6d ago

Force is seeping in. Managements are expecting that LLM-driven prouctivity-enhancers will be deployed and give broad-based boosts. More are each week. Supposedly cheaper than people. Those that aren't yet might be soon. When your performance review includes facility with and productivity with LLM tools, you are being forced.

themafia6d ago

The "whole industry." What, like 5 companies?

This is a "monopolized sector." They absolutely forced it on you. In most cases, sure, not directly, but their influence is the only driving force. Absent this no one would have jumped on this flimsy bandwagon.

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse