[shiomiru]

> I don't get it either, because that has always been the case, thus most of his post is borderline non sense.

Yes, making software development cheaper has been the main priority of the industry for a long time. The new development is that there's now a magic "do what I want" button that obviously won't quite do what you want but it's so cheap (for corporations, not humanity...) that you might as well pretend it does. (Compared to paying professionals who might even care about doing a good job, that is.)

[tracker1]

I've been a web application developer for nearly 30 years now. I care about the craft and discipline immensely. Then you pull up something like the Jack-In-The-Box menu site and fully realize that managers/executives don't give a damn if the stuff works well... 48MB of built JS?!? My daughter expressed how badly the site was working on her phone, and I got curious.

What's funny, is some will say, "use the app" instead for things like this... why should I trust someone to build a safe/secure app, who cannot build a reasonably functional website?

[ranger_danger]

To be fair, the app may be developed by a completely different team.

If your argument is still that you don't want to trust a company that can't make both functional, well... maybe you shouldn't be going to Jack-In-The-Box in the first place.

[tracker1]

My point is that I'm not going to give app-level access to my phone to a company that doesn't care enough to have a functional website. That said, I'm unlikely to install an app for anything on my device.

I don't actually install that many apps, and generally not retail apps anyway.

[GoblinSlayer]

I looked inside an average proprietary authenticator mobile app with 2 button interface and can confirm it's dumpster fire with 26mb of compiled code.

[int_19h]

The irony is that it is precisely because we all, collectively as software engineers, allowed the bar to be that low for so long, that AI coding is viable at all right now.