← Back to context

Comment by nomilk

11 hours ago

> He produced a great deal of code, a great deal of documentation, a great deal of what looked, to anyone who did not know what to look for, like progress. He could not, when asked, explain how any of it actually worked.

Solution: managers need to ask 'how does $THING_YOU_MADE actually work?'.

Pre-AI, it could be taken for granted that if someone was skilled enough to write complex code/documentation then they have a sound understanding of how it works. But that's no longer true. It only takes 5 minutes of questioning to figure out if they know their stuff or not. It's just that managers aren't asking (or perhaps aren't skilled enough to judge the answers).

On the issue of over-enthusiasm from upper management, this may be only temporary since it makes sense to try lots of new ideas (even the crazy ones) at the start of a technological revolution. After a while it will become clearer where the gains are and the wasteful ideas will be nixed.

>Solution: managers need to ask 'how does $THING_YOU_MADE actually work?'.

"Claude please tell me how $THING_YOU_MADE works in easy to understand language so I can explain it to my manager."

Memorise that and there you go. If the manager doesn't know how it works and has to trust the engineer, what are the chances that a memorised articulate explanation will satisfy them?

The issue (like most corpo issues) is one of incentives. Everyone's incentivised to do more work more quickly for a cheaper price. It's very fast to generate output but very slow to properly vet it.

What could change the current dynamics is if generation becomes way more expensive. Maybe that will happen because the token economy starts being subsidised? Maybe someone will eventually establish a monopoly on the agentic coding market and will start squeezing companies dependent on them?