> "The average time to upgrade an application to Java 17 plummeted from what’s typically 50 developer-days to just a few hours." *blink* ...why are they boast

> "The average time to upgrade an application to Java 17 plummeted from what’s typically 50 developer-days to just a few hours." *blink* ...why are they boasting about migrating to Java 17... in 2024? ...and from what versions were they migrating from? Java 17 didn't introduce any significant breaking-changes (IME) for users on Java 16 or even the next previous LTS version, Java 11 - I don't work at Amazon, but surely Amazon isn't in the habit of running on unsupported JVMs? - so assuming these Java projects were being competently maintained, then the only work actually required to migrate to 17 is changing your `org.gradle.java.home=` path to where JDK 17 followed by running your test suite. If Amazon was using a monorepo then 1 person could do this in 5 minutes with a 1-liner awk/sed command - whereas I expect it would likely take an AI far longer to do this, if it's even able to make sense of an Amazon-sized monorepo - they'd also likely re-prompt it for every separate project for reliability's sake. So after considering all that, the "50 days" number he gives, without any context either, is a nice shorthand to communicate his disconnection from what really goes-on inside his org... or he's lying - and he knows he's lying - but he also knows there won't be any negative consequences for him as a result of his lying, so why not lie if it gives you a good story to tell for LinkedIn? In conclusion: these remarks by leadership unintentionally make the company look bad, not good, once you fill-in-the-blanks to make up for what they dind't say. (What's next...? Big Brother increasing our chocolate ration to 20 grammes per week?) ----- One more thing: the comment-replies to the post on LinkedIn are utterly derranged and I genuinely can't put my sense of unease into words.