Mastodawn

Baldur Bjarnason Mar 4

(Following thread was prompted by people pointing out that the Bluesky dev team seems heavily into vibe-coding now and originally posted on said vibe-coded Bluesky platform that is now constantly failing.)

Over the past year, every single time one of the apps or services I use suddenly became less reliable and more buggy, I never have to look far for the "Claude is amazing and now writes most of my code" post for the devs involved.

Baldur Bjarnason Mar 4

Best part? It's always somebody with years of experience. Exactly the demographic that is supposedly able to use this shit safely, but my impression is they're just as bad as the novices

This is happening IMO because of one of the fundamental issues with software dev (and this predates "AI" and was one of the themes of my first book):

Most software projects fail and most of what gets shipped doesn't work. The way the industry is set up means there is little downside to shipping broken software

Baldur Bjarnason Mar 4

Few devs have a reference point for genuinely working software. Usability labs were disbanded over 20 years ago. Very few companies do actual user research, so their designs are based on fiction. Bugs are the norm

Alienation is also the norm for devs, both socially and organisationally. Whether it works for the end user doesn't cross their mind. Whether the design fulfils business needs is not their problem. Bugs are a future problem. Ship insecure software and patch it as user data gets stolen

Baldur Bjarnason

Devs are so disconnected from the output of their work that many of the norms of the industry are outright illegal: there's a good chance that if you follow popular practices for a React project, for example, you'll end up with a site or product that violates accessibility law in several countries

Few devs would even know where to begin to look to answer the question "does my software work for the people forced to use it?"

Baldur Bjarnason Mar 4

Because the element of coercion and a complete disregard for consent is now an integral part of how the industry works, but that's a topic for another day.

@baldur Whoever came up with 'Yes/Not now' needs to be dragged into the streets and shot.

No wonder some folks don't understand consent - our software doesn't allow for it.

Alexandre Oliva Mar 4

or the "You must allow our JavaScript programs to run on your browser, otherwise we won't allow you to get to the information that we're legally required to provide you with"

CC: @[email protected]

@lxo @baldur Don't forget the 'ole 'our site runs better in our app (and we won't let you view our site without it)'

arceuthobium Mar 4

@DarkestKale @lxo @baldur and then the app redirects back to the web browser for authentication anyway.

Chip Butty Mar 4

@baldur I do wonder how much of the disregard of consent is an artifact of being owned by the Epstein Class and the wannabes making this seem normal and grown up

Baldur Bjarnason Mar 4

@otfrom Yeah. I've been wondering the same.

@otfrom I think it’s a mistake to blame it on Epstein. The consent / coercion balance change arises from licensing vs ownership, and the extractive nature of sociopathic billionaires.

A billionaire is going to billionaire, (or a baron), because they’re sure they know best, and other people’s rules don’t need to apply to them.

Sure, a whole chunk of them will want particular expressions of transgressive control of the sort Epstein provided, but the control and coercion were there already.

Chip Butty Mar 4

@hypostase that's why I said Epstein Class

The control and coercion are what they are after. The material wealth (billionaires) is one way to get it (there are others, but money works well)

@otfrom Fair. I merely claim that an Epstein Class is a subset, and that, as popular a bugbear as the label is now, people like Ellison and Gates have always been bigger contributors to the problem. And that’s leaving aside the South African mob.

Chip Butty Mar 4

@hypostase I see Epstein as a synecdoche for the whole worldview. I don't mean any particular individuals or scene.

They revel in being able to trick others. They think they have the most merit. They think they can take what they want and deserve it. They think our lives don't matter (or at least not as much as theirs)

Chip Butty Mar 4

@hypostase though if any other name worked to properly get across what a problem the oligarchs are then I'd use it

@otfrom whereas I see Epstein as a lesser player, who crossed a very particular line, and was then being hung out to distract from the fundamental behaviour of the others. Wyrmtongue more than Saruman.

What he did was horrific, and needs to be stopped, and was hiding in plain sight, like ever so much child abuse.

But, much of the danger of the oligarchy, and their process of control, is not only in plain sight, but considered a necessary part of capitalist structure, and therefore good.

If we are to stop the former, we also need to stop the latter, and that’s harder to do without acknowledging that it’s there.

Chip Butty Mar 4

@hypostase ah, that might be where we differ then. The pedophilia was just part of Epstein circle. Taking children, taking money, threatening governments via insider knowledge and market collusion -- it is all there.

All the taking, and the only limit for them is where their whim takes them. They live to take what they want when they want in all things and they don't care about who gets hurt. Their feeling of supremacy protects them.

(Or at least this is what I'm seeing in the Epstein, Mandelson, Prince Andrew, Steve Bannon, Richard Branson, Elon Musk et al emails at the DOJ)

@otfrom yep. It’s all there. The danger is in thinking that it’s the only place that sort of collusion happens.

US gerrymandering, for example, is not fundamentally Epsteinian. It does introduce a very particular form of political corruption and control, that really needs to be addressed if consent is to become a forward part of political thinking.

But that’s not new, either.

FoolishOwl Mar 5

@baldur This is the first convincing explanation I've seen for why software engineers would not object to these broken tools.

spinnyspinlock Mar 4

@baldur years of industry "leaders” with new design patterns, a dozen development methodologies with the (sometimes misguided) intention of doing better software. Went from jokes about places using LOC as a productivity metric to bragging about how much (and only) code can be output

Deeply unserious industry

Andy in Indy Mar 4

@spinnyspinlock @baldur You could easily be describing the entire culture of capitalist management since WW2. Endless people management “strategies” that are just elaborate rain dances to avoid saying “pay good money, hire enough people to do the work, and treat them all with respect”.

spinnyspinlock Mar 4

@naptowncode @baldur It was not what I meant (valid interpretation though), some people do legitimately want to write good software. Or so I thought

Andy in Indy Mar 4

@spinnyspinlock @baldur Oh I agree! I think most devs want to write good code (and most managers want to manage well) but we’re all human and everybody wants a shortcut around the methodical work that is easy to describe but hard to do consistently well. Plus there’s bandwagon effect, learned helplessness, and a million other psychological traps that drag us away from the plain “just eat your damn vegetables already” style of work.

@baldur really interesting stuff I've not seen much before, thanks.

Can see how this stuff is enticing to someone just starting out but it blows my mind that experienced devs want to use it. Turned off several long time reads/listens because all they talk about now is AI

Alda Vigdís Mar 5

@baldur The disconnect (or alienation) is so baked into the industry that you'll get flagged as "potentially problematic" if you express field experience in the industry the software you interview for working on is aimed at.

Enola Knezevic Mar 5

@alda @baldur In my previous workplace, e-health, I pointed out that certain corner-cutting would cause patients to die.

My team lead: "You should come to the office to get COVID, so that you think less."

Alda Vigdís Mar 5

@rhelune @baldur Yup. People like that are so used to business software being shit that even if healthcare should be considered life critical, stuff like this isn't considered to be "real engineering" anyway.

Enola Knezevic Mar 5

@alda @baldur It seems to me that the field (management positions in any case) is attracting people without conscience.

Alda Vigdís Mar 5

@rhelune @baldur The game is about hiding your incompetence while pleasing those above you long enough to get promoted.

The Witch of Crow Briar Mar 5

@alda @rhelune @baldur oh, so much this. I would not have wanted to play that game even if I could, but not realizing the others around me were playing it really fucked me over.

Alda Vigdís Mar 5

@crowbriarhexe @rhelune @baldur This is basically the first thing that comes to my mind when I hear or read something akin to "autistic people have a difficult time getting promoted in the workplace".

David Adam Mar 5

@alda @baldur a friend of mine said "EAs exist so programmers don't have to talk to BAs, and BAs exist so that EAs don't have to talk to business representatives" which hit me like an arrow

Alda Vigdís Mar 5

@zanchey @baldur "Look! I already told you! I deal with the goddamn customers so the engineers don't have to! I have people skills! I am good at dealing with people! Can't you understand that!? What the hell is wrong with you people!?"

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fcIMIyQnOso

A lot of business relationship managers and team leads got into their positions by hiding their incompetence whilst pleasing upper management long enough to get promoted.

Office Space - "I Have People Skills!"

YouTube