3 ms·
> If a software engineer tells you that this code needs to be 100% test covered, that AI won’t replace them, and that they need 3 months of development—then you
by skwirl 2y ago
> If a software engineer tells you that this code needs to be 100% test covered, that AI won’t replace them, and that they need 3 months of development—then you better shut the fuck up and let them do their job.
This is so naive that it is impossible to take the author seriously.
- ses1984 2y agoIt’s called hyperbole.
- skwirl 2y agoNo, this paragraph was not hyperbole. This was in conclusion and the author’s serious opinion.
- Kiro 2y agoYou're replying to the author but I agree. Too much unfounded speculation. I'm glad the author is being called out for lack of research in a sibling comment.
- skwee357 2y agoIt was a hyperbolic statement related to the fact that if you want developers to take full responsibility, like surgeons, then you need trust their authority. I haven’t heard of a surgeon who said “this operation will take as much time as needed”, and the hospital manager pressured him to “finish it in 8 hours, and not use too many syringes”.
- ses1984 2y agoThe whole post is a rant.
- jkercher 2y agoWhat's naive?
- dakiol 2y agoWho else is in a better position to give an estimate than the people who design and build the thing?
- 9dev 2y agoIt leads to a conflict of interest: that’s why we have checks and balances in government, and draw a clear line between executive and legislative powers. If we simply accepted the fact that the wizards of the arcane machines knew what they do and the rest of us is at their mercy, then we would also loose any organisational control. I’m sure that sounds tempting to some engineers, but business people actually do serve a purpose. Acting like the all-knowable developers will surely do right just isn’t a good business strategy.
- mondrian 2y agoThe concept that you can't take the blame if you're not given the responsibility is not naive.