Agree, and “defer” can mean organizationally as in needing someone else’s input, knowledge, support, buy-in…vs. running an autocratic hierarchy, which the weak and stupid prefer. Defer also means acknowledging the value and contributions of others and compensating them accordingly.
If I had to boil a lot of the churn in the water about AI, it’s by stupid people trying to sell even stupider, desperate people the idea the immense knowledge of the earth (or even that of their accounting or customer service practices) will be within their grasp and they won’t need others anymore. Of course, some say great cut headcount, because they didn’t understand the work others do in the first place.
While most won’t fully take an approach as extreme, and any AI use will likely be more organic, there will be outliers who receive the bulk of the press.
Saying you don’t need X position in early 2025 based on the state of AI is like declaring in 1996 libraries are dead.
My read of it was “the C-suite hates when the engineers actually know how shit works, and the leadership must kowtow to the people doing the actual work.” YMMV or the commentor may have meant something completely different.
It’s not about business optimization, it’s about not having to defer to someone’s knowledge from the position of power.
AI bubble makes so much sense when you start looking at it this way.
I think it’s just that MBA types see engineering and support as costing money and sales as making money.
deleted by creator
Agree, and “defer” can mean organizationally as in needing someone else’s input, knowledge, support, buy-in…vs. running an autocratic hierarchy, which the weak and stupid prefer. Defer also means acknowledging the value and contributions of others and compensating them accordingly.
If I had to boil a lot of the churn in the water about AI, it’s by stupid people trying to sell even stupider, desperate people the idea the immense knowledge of the earth (or even that of their accounting or customer service practices) will be within their grasp and they won’t need others anymore. Of course, some say great cut headcount, because they didn’t understand the work others do in the first place.
While most won’t fully take an approach as extreme, and any AI use will likely be more organic, there will be outliers who receive the bulk of the press.
Saying you don’t need X position in early 2025 based on the state of AI is like declaring in 1996 libraries are dead.
What does that mean? “Defer” “knowledge” “position” & “power” aren’t connecting in my head…
My read of it was “the C-suite hates when the engineers actually know how shit works, and the leadership must kowtow to the people doing the actual work.” YMMV or the commentor may have meant something completely different.