4 ms·
Because it quickly became a tool that was so useful that I feel I am doing my job better with than without now that it’s available. Similiar to how I would disr
by hxugufjfjf 3y ago
Because it quickly became a tool that was so useful that I feel I am doing my job better with than without now that it’s available. Similiar to how I would disregard rules and/or quit if I was not allowed to use my operating system of choice at work or was denied the use of a specific tool integral to doing my job (well).
- tjr 3y agoAh, so you are not disregarding this particular rule, but you disregard all rules that you feel impede you. That answers my question, thank you -- this has nothing in particular to do with GPT tools.
- meghan_rain 3y agoArrogant software devs thinking this labour shortage of code monkeys will continue in perpetuity
- sangnoir 3y agoWhat labor shortage? It's an employer's market right now, with a glut of high-quality candidates looking for jobs.
- hxugufjfjf 3y agoNo. I follow many rules, even if I like them or not. I picked one simple example of a rule I would consider a dealbreaker for my employment to illustrate how many people have already started using ChatGPT so heavily in their workflows that they would consider it detrimental if their employer took it away from them. But yes, it might not really have anything to do with GPT specifically besides it apparently being a very useful tool for a lot of employees, given that some would at least claim to quit their jobs over being prevented from using it.
- tjr 3y agoThank you again. I did not mean to claim that you disregard literally all rules, and I apologize for coming across that way. I find your explanation sound and reasonable. There are many rules that, even if not necessarily liked, are not sufficient grounds to do anything about. But sometimes rules may impede your workflow so much that you find it preferable to either quietly work around the rule, or even to quit.
- hxugufjfjf 3y agoI appreciate your apology as it sort of came across that way. I'll give you a real-life anecdotal example to expand a little on my point. My buddy is a front-end developer for a company which produce pretty basic "stuff" (sorry, I don't know anything about front-end) according to him. He says that he's gotten lazy and unmotivated to do anything about it. This leaves him unchallenged and he doesn't really like his job. Once GPT arrived, he's been able to (according to himself) reduce 70 % of the boring boiler-plate code type work he has been doing for years, by making GPT write it for him, and him just verifying it works. This has ultimately allowed him not only to focus on taking on more interesting projects where he can challenge himself, but also spending a lot of the time he previously spent writing "bullshit boiler-plate code" in learning new and more challenging front-end things. I can easily imagine people in other jobs, in IT or perhaps in other fields already using GPT to reduce the boring parts of their jobs. I can genuinly not recall having heard anyone say a new IDE or any other tool since the arrival of the computer itself reduce their "boring work" load this signifcantly. So I think at this point it is reasonable to assume that access to GPT will become considered as commonplace as having access to a computer or email (given you work in a field where those are considered basic/primary tools of course), and that employers will have to adapt. If not, people will disregard rules / go "shadow IT" or even consider quitting.