That’s why they don’t see any problem with replacing workers with AI. They think AI will do X better than humans do just like machines could build X better than humans could at the beginning of the industrial revolution.

But the cost benefit analysis often proves to be quite the opposite in the long-term, despite deceptive short-term gains. But a short-term gains seem to be all that businesses seem to care about.

That's one of the core injustices of capitalism.

Rich person says "Build a thing"

Workers design, research, and build the thing.

Rich person keeps the profits.

And because of that, unfortnately, a lot of regular people also think the entire point of technology and wealth is to never have to do anything substantive.

You forgot the part where they steal the pizzas from other parlors to sell them as thier own.

Cheese Pizza

Then FBI strums in

I fully get where you’re coming from. I fully believe that you can’t vibe code correctly unless you already know how to code correctly. I’m against the shifting paradigm of “who cares what the code looks like aa long as it works properly and the LLM can read it quickly” bullshit that’s coming out of it. I want to read the code and understand it too. I want it to be object oriented and not just dumb ad hoc methods everywhere that’s 1,000 lines when it could’ve been 100 lines.

Now anecdotally, as someone who uses it for my main work and side project, I am still getting a lot of use out of it. I’m learning new things at a faster rate than I would have before. For my side project, I am trying to optimize gear sets for a game and there’s hundreds of millions of different configurations. The LLM I’m using knows about my code and the project and what I need and is able to suggest other algorithms, like I was able to learn about Dinkelbach’s algorithm. I have it write up design docs with formulas and pseudocode implementation and I review that and it takes my comments into account. I treat it like a junior developer and ask for questions to make sure I understand what it’s doing. I think a lot of people aren’t treating it like a junior developer or intern and that’s where problems come from.

Now, I wouldn’t be using it if it wasn’t free with my company, as this is more of “learning/research” for my job.

And for my job, we have semantic memory and a ton of MCP servers setup that guide it through the right code and can do internal documentation search so it’s way more powerful than just using base Claude Code or whatever. It has helped me stay more on track with my projects as an ADHD person (even though I’m medicated) by documenting what it does after it does it in a shared doc rather than me forgetting to do that because I run a command and log off for the day or something.

I do hate the water usage and energy usage though…

Imagine if you put that much time into a useful skill.

*from the dumpsters of several other restaurants

Yeah I was surprised no other comments here picked that up, I thought that had to be on purpose.

You forgot to specify Italian DOP cheese, now you have a pizza oozing with shitty Kraft/Lactalis pseudo-cheese.

Receives pizza

"Why is it covered with pineapple?!?"

How is this different from what anybody who hires or employs people do?

Fun question.

1. Most employees will someday no longer be day-one idiot employees. (conttasted with AI)
2. Many managers take a class or something to know how to get results from their employees. (in contrast with many people given unlimited token allowances)
3. Most employees are capable of a relationship amd even loyalty, if any is merited. (in contrast with corporate AI API vendors who only want to extract wealth)

I think most people leading a team would say "we built this". Personally, if I hire someone to build something for me, I'd say something like "I had this built" intead of saying I built it myself.

I think there should be a short form for "I had AI do this for me"... "I prompted" maybe?

This reads like a rebuttal but I'm not seeing it a contradiction.

If you don't provide the ideas, manage the logistics, supply the labor, test for quality, etc., then I wouldn't say that you were a part of making it. You're an investor, certainly, but that's not a maker.

Well see that's the thing about patent/copyright/trademark/etc laws that don't make sense to me. If it's illegal to copy someone's idea and sell it as your own how is it viable to ask AI to do something where it pulls all of the data from someone else's work and gives it to you and you sell it as your own. (Or use it to make something you sell) In general it would make sense that you would have to pay the person who's idea it was you used for each sale... Or that no one can own any idea, and patents/copyrights shouldn't exist at all.

Family recipe

"That's a good looking pizza, look at that cheese"

"... Thanks! White glue is commonly used in the industry to get a picture perfect cheese pull"

That’s if you use AI at work. But instead of the fam, it’s your boss.