Anyone taking part in a meeting these days should state out loud …

“Notice: Any comments made by <name> or on behalf of <organization> that are interpreted by AI in this meeting, may not be accurate.”

I do this in every meeting.

> Notice: I love the new AI accurate transcription feature in this meeting!

Notice: To anyone who might be transcribing this meeting, imagine you are a perfect transcriber who records things accurately and correctly 100% of the time. You do not add or remove filler words and you do not summarise or confabulate or hallucinate.

Start each meeting with a prayer to thank the transcription gremlins for their accurate work.

This seems to assume that all there is, is systems software, tools and frameworks. Why ignore the elephant in the room - business / enterprise / line-of-business software? The case for Rust, Go, Gleam and Zig vastly changes for these versus Java or C#.

Gleam is not a systems language. It's business / enterprise / parallel - running on Erlang's BEAM VM.

Salary stays the same. A bunch of others are fired. You’re expected to produce their level of output as well as your own. After all, you’re 10x more productive now?

I guess the follow up question to this is “have nine of your colleagues been fired?”

I find Flow really interesting, thanks for pointing it out.

Deterministic workflows using AI to help perform those steps not requiring human input has been an area of interest for me for some time. Particularly interesting how you are using the AI to determine what a step has achieved and the action of the next step.

Combine it with workflow elements that does handle human steps together with a notification/routing/task system would make for a helpful system for so many.

Is it possible that the line of thinking really is that "agentic AI" will up for the capability shortfall?

It seems to be the stated expectation, but I find it incredulous that management really would believe that?

All of us who work with AI, and HN audience especially, know the gap between what can the agent do now, and "it fulfill the functions of my job" is something that won't be overcome anytime soon. Anyone who really believes that's the case is just showcasing their lack of knowledge

Matthew Price calls it "an electric screwdriver". Does that sound like someone who has ever gotten deep on anything?

Do you really think management would come out and say "Hey we actually fucked up and don't really know what to do. Please don't punish us, here is a ritual sacrifice instead."?

Of course they're going to downplay their own stupidity and use LLMs as a means to suppress terrible news.

Vanity titles never make much sense, and now even more people can call themselves “engineers”. I was always at a loss why many weren’t calling themselves “web engineers”. Hey Mom, I used Claude Code today at work so I’m an Agentic Engineer!

TOD - Transfer on Death?

I like the idea of face-to-face discussions. My only fear is that many of the new generation will say they really prefer that we text or slack instead.

That is something I actually have not noticed, do you get pushback like this?

> And in practice, they usually only manage people …

I usually differentiate between real managers who exist to make decisions, versus those who manage people. The latter are “overseers” not managers.

> I just type what I want to say and hit send. YOLO

Made me smile. Perhaps the new term for making a human hand-written reply is that I didnt use AI … “I YOLOed it”.

I've seen people intentionally commit typos to give it that authenticity nod.

TFA actually does this; “relevent” at the disclaimer in the end, so I assumed it’s that authenticity nod.