|
This is a pretty wild take. "They don't know what DevOps or SRE is" is not the flex the author thinks it is. That's just ignorance of the consequences of shipping. There's a huge load-bearing assumption in it, as well, which is that AI agent-generated code is correct and bug free. The tight loop only works if the agent reliably produces working, correct, production-ready code. If that were the case, the loop might be intent -> build -> observe. But in reality, it's likely intent -> build -> realize the AI hallucinated an API that doesn't exist -> fix -> discover it broke something else -> fix -> realize the architecture doesn't fit a constraint you thought you had -> start over. Not to mention that SDLC things like, I dunno, PR reviews and requirements planning aren't some arcane ceremony designed to waste everyone's time. The ceremonies themselves might be bloated, but the function serves a purpose. Generating 500 PRs isn't a flex either. Volume is not a feature. If your system produces more changes than you can verify, you don't have a review problem, you have a quality problem. There's some truth buried in here, but the overarching post is so wildly disconnected from real software development that I'm having a hard time following along. Greenfield prototypes? Sure, maybe there's a case for that. But the minute you hit any novel or complex system with more than a couple of engineers, this falls apart pretty fast. |
what people are betting on is that the latter reality will give way to the promised land of intent -> build -> observe. the prize for that is self-evidently enormous.