4 ms·
> You're being reductive or just obtuse. > or, at least, they should Seems like you are the obtuse one here, and you appear to know it.
by tossandthrow 2mo ago
> You're being reductive or just obtuse.
> or, at least, they should
Seems like you are the obtuse one here, and you appear to know it.
- EvanAnderson 2mo agoI don't get how saying companies should hold their employees accountable, which doesn't always happen, is somehow obtuse. I give up. I feel like you're a robot designed to waste my time.
- tossandthrow 2mo agoFair enough, that's on you. You are talking from an ideal point of view. You want the companies to hold employees responsible. But that is is not how it work. Why you appear obtuse. Eg. Look at th3 therac25 case. No developers was held accountable. We have spend more than a decade remove accountability from indiviauls. Using limited liability, insurance, and workers protection. Accountability is the last reason why we need humans over agents.
- EvanAnderson 2mo agoSorry for the exasperation. At the start of this you said: "For 99.999% of people, it is literally kthxbye on all code they execute on all their devices." I think that's inaccurate. The vast majority of code running on "all their devices" is code made by employees of companies being held accountable through traditional industry methods, or free.open source projects where reputational integrity was at stake. Those developers have been held accountable, for some value of accountable. Maybe there's less value in human accountability than I think there is. Only time will tell. That's a different conversation. The code running "for 99.999% of people" is not "literally kthxbye" LLM-generated code without someone behind it holding accountability. Maybe it will be in the future, but it's not now.