Please be respectful. I find it incredibly dismissive that you would use such language to describe such amazing individuals. They revolutionized the industry. They built a game engine to render text for cripes sake! So please get it right.
A strange issue I’ve found is careless use of AI at my job has lead to many people rolling their own incomplete mini parsers. Think YAML parsers of a frontmatter that expects either `key: value` exactly or treats `item1, item2, …` as a list.
It’s a litmus test I use to see if someone actually glanced over what the AI generated.
The problem is using AI to “push” the answer to an asker.
Unless the company has hidden docs they use for support (which why would that ever benefit them), I could get just as good of an answer if I point my LLM at your docs (“pull” an answer). In fact, the response might be better because I have context set up to tune it to my understanding.
Instead, you (company / support agent) have decided that I should instead have a conversation with an LLM through a worse, more opaque harness to the detriment of all of us.
It’s the fat introduced by the process that annoys me the most. The user of the LLM had an idea, but it got greased up and packaged into something that the average person would create, not a specialist in the domain.
It dumbs down everything into a single perspective / way of presenting a topic.
In really large codebases grep and find timeout. If you operate at that scale you quickly come to realize Claude will not use the tools you built to make searching feasible.
https://x.com/trq212/status/2014051501786931427