5 ms·

This reminds me of a friend whose company ran a daily perl script that committed every financial transaction of the day to a database. Without the script, the c

This reminds me of a friend whose company ran a daily perl script that committed every financial transaction of the day to a database. Without the script, the company could literally make no money irrespectively of sales because this database was one piece in a complex system for payment processor interoperability. The script ran in a machine located at the corner of a cubicle and only one employee had the admin password. Nobody but a handful of people knew of the machine's existence, certainly not anyone in middle management and above. The script could only be updated by an admin. Copilot may be good, but sure as hell doesn't know that admin password.

danielbln 1y ago
If your mission critical process sits on some on-site box that no-one knows about, copilot being good or not is the least of your problems.
- maccard 1y ago
  Everywhere I’ve ever worked has had that mission critical box. At one of my jobs we had a server rack with UPS, etc, all the usual business. On the floor next to it was a dell desktop with a piece of paper on it that said “do not turn off”. It had our source control server in it, and the power button didn’t work. We did eventually move it to something more sensible but we had that for a long time
  - victorbjorklund 1y ago
    with only one person on earth being able to access it? so if that person is hit by a car everything goes down?
    - glimshe 1y ago
      Pretty much
    - maccard 1y ago
      yeah. I mean, someone else would _eventually_ figure it out. There wasn't full disk encryption or anyhting on it, so if the guy got hit by a bus, and the machien turned off we probably would have just imaged the disk and got it running in a VM. But we didn't (and nobody was hit by a bus)
      - victorbjorklund 1y ago
        and you think that is good practice? sounds pretty terrible.
        maccard 1y ago
        I never said it’s good practice, simply that it happens.
ozim 1y ago
This sort of gimmick is not going to help anyone keeping their job.
- chaps 1y ago
  Sadly, nah. It works.
chaps 1y ago
An old colleague and friend used to print out a 30 page perl script he wrote to do almost exactly this in this scenario. A stapled copy could always be found on his dining room table.
- onionisafruit 1y ago
  Was the printed copy a backup system or casual reading?
  - chaps 1y ago
    Yes.
    - buellerbueller 1y ago
      <3 inclusive or.
victorbjorklund 1y ago
That sounds pretty bad. Not a great argument against AI: "Our employees have created such a bad mess that AI wont work because only they know how the mess they created works".
- deleted 1y ago
  [deleted]
- intended 1y ago
  That is the luxury of theory. Yes, most situations are terrible compared to what would be if an expert was present to perfect it. Except if there isn’t an expert, and there’s a normal person, how do they know the output is right ?
  - victorbjorklund 1y ago
    not sure I get your point?
    - timeinput 1y ago
      I think the parent is saying what if the AI made such a terrible mess that the team of imperfect people thought it was fine, but it was just as bad as the terrible mess the team would have created because the team is not capable of evaluating whether it's a good idea or not. (possible follow on consequences -- no one can debug it or figure out if it's a good idea either)
    - recursive 1y ago
      The point is that in real companies the bad mess already exists. So it is a good argument. Or at least a practical one.
    - intended 1y ago
      As the two other commenters pointed out The mess already existed for a reason. There’s a certain amount of expertise in the average firm. If they could afford an expert, they wouldn’t be the same firm. If they do get an AI expert - how do they check the output given the level of ability they have?
testing22321 1y ago
My last job at a telco I was in charge of a system that billed ~5 million dollars monthly. When the machine was built, the guy that did it didn’t record the root password. He added me to sudoers before he left. I left a few years later, nobody took ownership. Looking at the web interface, I can tell it’s still running, doing its thing. I’m sure its still running Linux from 2008.
MagicMoonlight 1y ago
And that’s why consultants exist, because employees do insane shit like that

danielbln 1y ago

If your mission critical process sits on some on-site box that no-one knows about, copilot being good or not is the least of your problems.

maccard 1y ago
Everywhere I’ve ever worked has had that mission critical box. At one of my jobs we had a server rack with UPS, etc, all the usual business. On the floor next to it was a dell desktop with a piece of paper on it that said “do not turn off”. It had our source control server in it, and the power button didn’t work. We did eventually move it to something more sensible but we had that for a long time
- victorbjorklund 1y ago
  with only one person on earth being able to access it? so if that person is hit by a car everything goes down?
  - glimshe 1y ago
    Pretty much
  - maccard 1y ago
    yeah. I mean, someone else would _eventually_ figure it out. There wasn't full disk encryption or anyhting on it, so if the guy got hit by a bus, and the machien turned off we probably would have just imaged the disk and got it running in a VM. But we didn't (and nobody was hit by a bus)
    - victorbjorklund 1y ago
      and you think that is good practice? sounds pretty terrible.
      - maccard 1y ago
        I never said it’s good practice, simply that it happens.

ozim 1y ago

This sort of gimmick is not going to help anyone keeping their job.

chaps 1y ago
Sadly, nah. It works.

chaps 1y ago

An old colleague and friend used to print out a 30 page perl script he wrote to do almost exactly this in this scenario. A stapled copy could always be found on his dining room table.

onionisafruit 1y ago
Was the printed copy a backup system or casual reading?
- chaps 1y ago
  Yes.
  - buellerbueller 1y ago
    <3 inclusive or.

victorbjorklund 1y ago

That sounds pretty bad. Not a great argument against AI: "Our employees have created such a bad mess that AI wont work because only they know how the mess they created works".

deleted 1y ago
[deleted]
intended 1y ago
That is the luxury of theory. Yes, most situations are terrible compared to what would be if an expert was present to perfect it. Except if there isn’t an expert, and there’s a normal person, how do they know the output is right ?
- victorbjorklund 1y ago
  not sure I get your point?
  - timeinput 1y ago
    I think the parent is saying what if the AI made such a terrible mess that the team of imperfect people thought it was fine, but it was just as bad as the terrible mess the team would have created because the team is not capable of evaluating whether it's a good idea or not. (possible follow on consequences -- no one can debug it or figure out if it's a good idea either)
  - recursive 1y ago
    The point is that in real companies the bad mess already exists. So it is a good argument. Or at least a practical one.
  - intended 1y ago
    As the two other commenters pointed out The mess already existed for a reason. There’s a certain amount of expertise in the average firm. If they could afford an expert, they wouldn’t be the same firm. If they do get an AI expert - how do they check the output given the level of ability they have?

testing22321 1y ago

My last job at a telco I was in charge of a system that billed ~5 million dollars monthly. When the machine was built, the guy that did it didn’t record the root password. He added me to sudoers before he left. I left a few years later, nobody took ownership. Looking at the web interface, I can tell it’s still running, doing its thing. I’m sure its still running Linux from 2008.

MagicMoonlight 1y ago

And that’s why consultants exist, because employees do insane shit like that