this post was submitted on 31 May 2026
1088 points (98.1% liked)
Fuck AI
7577 readers
611 users here now
"We did it, Patrick! We made a technological breakthrough!"
A place for all those who loathe AI to discuss things, post articles, and ridicule the AI hype. Proud supporter of working people. And proud booer of SXSW 2024.
AI, in this case, refers to LLMs, GPT technology, and anything listed as "AI" meant to increase market valuations.
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
What is it about LLMs that makes so many devs' brains melt?
Studies have already shown that the moment you start relegating code to LLMs you kinda just start using them as a crutch even if you don’t need them.
Staff Engineer here. Our CTO told us in March two things. One, if we didn't get on board with AI then we would be unemployable in 3 months and two, we had to use AI for everything. Literally everything. I asked (as a senior engineer of 19 years) if that included simple bug fixes I see that take minutes vs 30+ describing the problem. The answer was "absolutely". Our budget is $400K /month to Anthropic and we exceeded that 3 weeks into May
Update on this: those people who didn't incorporate it into their workflow have been let go. Last night they released 1/6th of the staff.
Pump those numbers, make them regret the decision.
Also that’s an insane budget for AI.
I'm doing my part!
Unfortunately "doing your part" is making the AI companies look like they have revenue just before IPO.
Yeah until CTOs start to realize that they spent the budget to double the workforce on tokens while producing nothing of lasting value. Nobody profits from LLM code except LLM companies.
That's my hope anyway...
Fucking hell, that's so much money to burn on management's AI addiction. Have to wonder how your finance department feels about burning almost half a million a month.
Also, wild that management is telling you that not letting your skills degrade by handing everything off to an AI is what'll make you unemployable.
They think once the ball is rolling, then they can phase out the humans.
They think that AI usage is like training a junior dev, that it starts out hopeless but over time can operate without the expertise.
They don't realize that invoking AI doesn't work that way, that the context window is the only accumulation of anything germain to your codebase, and that the model doesn't evolve based on that interaction.
So they don't care about the skills, they want to get to the point where they can toss a prompt into Claude and have it all taken care of, thinking that their employee usage of it somehow accelerates that outcome.
That's just a handful of enthusiastic interns, except that you aren't investing in cultivating future talent...
Burn that budget. Make the CFO pull their hair out when they look at expenses vs revenue. For once, bean counters might save us from this BS.
If they're anything like my company's executive team, they're using AI to make their decisions too. They're being spoonfed the issue isn't AI underperforming, it's you.
They'll soon fire you first before capitulate on the notion their AI implementation sucks.
but that would just cause the entire company to implode (scorpion and frog dot jpeg)
Gaming the AI bubble is difficult when you're a customer.
400k a month is quite a bit of GPU power. I do not understand why software companies aren't at least offsetting their Claude usage with open source models running on their own hardware. It seems like a no brainer. Opus is really good but most tasks aren't that complex and a smaller model will work just as well.
Because no one ever got fired for buying IBM.
Sometimes I'm sad I quit software development as a job. So much room for malicious compliance with this AI bullshit. And if something goes wrong you can just blame it on the AI you were forced to use. The fun I could have had..
Ours said the same thing back in December. Our principal engineer said we had to start using the chatbot for all coding.
I’ve tried it but at some point it gets faster for me to do it myself 50% of the time. And some of the other times it’s just flat out wrong. The times it gets it right are great; but I hate feeling like I’m relying on a slot machine for my job.
I just started using it just to commit and for PRs to make it look like I’m using it all the time. Burns tokens and execs can’t tell the difference.
Towards the end of the month I just start generating mindless crap so I don't get "dinged" for under-using AI.
The rest of the month I always set the model to the most expensive to try to naturally burn through my quota and get marginally less annoyed by the even worse suggestions from the default models.
Since burning through tokens really involves letting it invoke commands, I don't really burn that much naturally since I don't like reviewing and approving commands and I'm sure as hell not going to let it just run comands at will.
It's always the damn suits.
People lazy.
Here it seems like panic in the face of things like the CopyFail/DirtyFrag/Fragnesia/ssh-keysign-pwn stuff.
That if he didn't let AI 'fix' the issues it can find first, then someone will hit rsync with devastating CVEs.
Problem is he saw that the tool was offering to 'fix' things that perhaps weren't quite right and saw a credible proposal to implement fixes, but the fixes were for bugs no one cared about or noticed and weren't security related, but incurred side effects that people did notice.
If you have a non-security bug that's been in place since 2019 and the only thing that noticed was an LLM analysis of your codebase, it may be best to let sleeping dogs lie...
https://arxiv.org/abs/2506.08872