I think it comes down to a fear of uncertainty. It's comfortable to believe in authority.
Authority provides the illusion of a sense of control, predictability, certainty and orderliness, and it's like we gravitate toward that even when it leads to bad outcomes for us.
For most of us the fear of being out of control seems to be greater than the fear of being controlled.
I'm not sure it's even uncertainty. Authority carries a bigger stick, and things like witch hunts and burning of heretics and rebel peasants, have deselected independence of mind over the centuries. Society has an unconscious memory of what used to happen when people disagreed. And still does in some places.
People today worship the white lab coat and the military/police uniform in the same way their ancestors honoured witch doctors/shamans and the tribe's warriors. They assume the former groups will dish out good advice and the latter will protect them. The general public experiences this in hospitals and schools, with psychiatric hospitals being the most extreme version of hierarchy. I've mentioned that I currently have two friends who are stuck in a mental hospital, and I have told both of them that they need to be respectful of staff if they want to get out sooner. The woman seems to have had her day passes revoked, and been placed on a more secure ward, after being cheeky to staff. Maybe the staff were awful but she isn't in much of a position to negotiate — she's been in there for nine months. (I've heard rumours of one of the other patients being sexually assaulted by staff, but thanks to the nature of these places I don't know whether it is fantasy or a real crime, since the supposed victim is doped up to the eyeballs much of the time and would not remember it properly.)
- it adds superfluous logic that is assumed but isn’t necessary
- as a result the code is more complex, verbose, harder to follow
- it doesn’t quite match the domain because it makes a bunch of assumptions that aren’t true in this particular domain
They’re things that can often be missed in a first pass look at the code but end up adding a lot of accidental complexity that bites you later.
When reading an unfamiliar code base we tend to assume that a certain bit of logic is there for a good reason, and that helps you understand what the system is trying to do. With generative codebases we can’t really assume that anymore unless the code has been thoroughly audited/reviewed/rewritten, at which point I find it’s easier to just write the code myself.
This has been my experience as well. But, these are things we developers care about.
Coding aside, LLM's aren't very good at following nice practices in general unless explicitly prompted to. For example if you ask an LLM to create an error modal box from scratch, will it also implement the ability to select the text, or being able to ctrl c to copy the text, or perhaps a copy message button? Maybe this is a bad example, but they usually don't do things like this unless you explicitly ask them to. I don't personally care too much about this, but I think it's noteworthy in the context of lay people using LLM's to vibe code.
> it’d be wasteful for evolution to only use the brain for computation
Even what we consciously experience as the brain is really only a tiny part of the brain.
The little language centre and the capacity to imagine are only a tiny subset of a multitude of brain functions and yet we believe that those two functions make up “me”. Actually it’s just those two functions telling a story that they are me.
A common trick is that the first click on the X will go to the ad, but if you return and click the X again it will close, gaslighting you into thinking you just misclicked the first time.
Another trick that I’ve noticed on the Reddit app is that the tappable area is much larger for ads than normal posts. If you tap even near the ad it will visit the ad
> Every previous job I've had has a similar pattern. The engineer is not supposed to engage directly with the customer.
Chiming in to say I’ve experienced the same.
A coworker who became a good friend ended up on a PIP and subsequently fired for “not performing” soon after he helped build a non technical team a small tool that really helped them do their job quicker. He wasn’t doing exactly as he was told and I guess that’s considered not performing.
Coincidentally the person who pushed for him to be fired was an ex-Google middle manager.
I’ve also seen so commonly this weird stigma around engineers as if we’re considered a bit unintelligent when it comes to what users want.
Maybe there is something to higher ups having some more knowledge of the business processes and the bigger picture, but I’m not convinced that it isn’t also largely because of insecurity and power issues.
If you do something successful that your manager didn’t think of and your manager is insecure about their own abilities, good chance they’ll feel threatened.
> - this argument may well be stuck in the collective unconscious of lots of people (albeit in the religious context)
Another example of such a belief is that "humans are inherently evil" which seems to have been planted in Western society by the concept of original sin. Interestingly the idea that sin was about our inherent badness didn't really arise until the struggle against Gnosticism [1] hundreds of years after Jesus died.
Now the belief is pervasive in secular society thanks to stories like "Lord of the Flies".
It's fascinating how even though we can call ourselves non religious we can still carry these beliefs around.
If you're still in Sydney I'd argue that large numbers of people paddled out off of Bondi Beach because of a pervasive Australian belief that there's always a few arseholes but most people are fundamentally good and community support is better than nothing.
You likely saw a couple of extremists repeatedly tackled and then dropped by the public and police, and near real time running in to help victims.
That's somewhat contra to the bleak of "humans are inherently evil".
Maybe the message of Lord of the Flies was that nuclear weapons and the Cold War depressed at least one author and that boys need mentors.
Don't get me wrong, I don't think humans are inherently evil. In fact in times of crisis (like the one you mention) we do tend to come together and I think that's evidence that the belief is incorrect.
I just had a discussion the other day with somebody who outright told me that they think humans are inherently evil and must be managed under a system to keep in order. I don't think it's an uncommon belief and nor do I think it's a bleak world because that belief exists, it's just a mistaken belief.
I would argue that you see the belief raise its head far more when people are interacting with others who they don't consider in their "in-group".
Same, I think there's an idealistic belief in people who write those tickets that something can be perfectly specified upfront.
Maybe for the most mundane, repetitive tasks that's true.
But I'd argue that the code is the full specification, so if you're going to fully specify it you might as well just write the code and then you'll actually have to be confronted with your mistaken assumptions.
> I suspect the wealthy think they can shield themselves by exerting control over
Agreed and I think this is a result of a naive belief that we humans tend to have that controlling thoughts can control reality. Politicians still live by this belief but eventually reality and lived experience does catch up. By that time all trust is long gone.
It would be kinda funny if not so tragic how economists will argue both "[productive improvement] will make things cheaper" and then in the next breath "deflation is bad and must be avoided at all costs"
I think the idea of dollars as purely a trading medium where absolute prices don't matter wouldn't be such an issue if wages weren't always the last thing to rise with inflation.
As it is now anyone with assets is only barely affected by inflation while those who earn a living from wages have their livelihood eroded over time covertly.
Authority provides the illusion of a sense of control, predictability, certainty and orderliness, and it's like we gravitate toward that even when it leads to bad outcomes for us.
For most of us the fear of being out of control seems to be greater than the fear of being controlled.