[herodoturtle]

Lots of comments here critiquing the article for allegedly being written by AI.

I see the post is even flagged now.

Irrespective of who wrote it or how it was written, the essay is packed with wisdom.

I’ve been programming for 30+ years and leading teams for the last 20 - and I found the essay deeply insightful.

I realise I’m a sample size of 1, but just figured I’d comment here to advocate against this post being flagged. Surprised that it is.

[fauigerzigerk]

I'm not opposed to AI generated text in principle. But not knowing how it was written is problematic, because it can change the meaning of the text. Take this paragraph for instance:

"From my experience building and scaling teams in fintech and high-traffic platforms, I can tell you that role expansion without clear boundaries always leads to the same outcome: people try to do everything, nothing gets done with the depth it requires, and burnout follows."

This reads like a first person account of someone's experience. Is it though? If it's nobody's experience then it robs this text of its meaning. If it is somebody's experience and that person used AI to improve their style then that's absolutely fine with me.

[randomtoast]

I would prefer to have the prompt he used to generate the article. Similarly, for compiled binaries, I would rather have the source code that produced them, instead of just an .exe file.

[hsuduebc2]

I agree with you. I found it interesting too.

[ramoz]

why was it flagged?

[johnnyanmac]

Got unflagged. Really speaks to HN's priorities when slop can get unflagged but negative news against the tech overlords is "too political".

>Irrespective of who wrote it or how it was written, the essay is packed with wisdom.

As always: if they can't be bothered to write, why am I bothered to read it?

Especially on this topic. I know the exact fear mongering and catch phrases it's going to say here. "AI is here to stay", "you need to get with the times or get out", etc. There's nothing new nor wisdom in this.