Wrong answer. If you don’t give them access, the alternative (ruling out not using AI because leadership will never go for that) is to hire high school kids to take a task from a manager, ask the ai to do it, then do what the AI says repeatedly to iterate to the solution. The problem with that alt is that it is no better than giving the ai access, and it leaves you with no senior tech people. Instead, you give it access, but only give senior tech people access to the AI. Ones who would know to tell the AI to have a backup of the database, one designed to not let you delete it without multiple people signing off.
Senior tech people aren’t going to spend thier time trying things an AI needs tried to find the solution. So if you don’t give it access, they won’t use it, and eventually they will all be gone. Then you are even further up shit creek than you are now.
The answer overall, is smarter people talking to the AI, and guardrails to stop a single point of failure. The later is nothing new.
The alternative is that the only thing with access to make changes in your production environment is the CI pipeline that deploys your production environment.
Neither the AI, nor anything else on the developers machine, should have access to make production changes.
I’m in favour of hiring kids to figure out the solution through iteration and doing web searches etc. If they fuck up, then they learn and eventually become better at their job - maybe even becoming a Senior themselves eventually.
I get what you’re saying - Seniors are more likely to use the tools more effectively, but there are many cases of the AI not doing what its told. Its not repeatably consistent like a bash script.
Stop giving chat bots tools with this kind of access.
Wrong answer. If you don’t give them access, the alternative (ruling out not using AI because leadership will never go for that) is to hire high school kids to take a task from a manager, ask the ai to do it, then do what the AI says repeatedly to iterate to the solution. The problem with that alt is that it is no better than giving the ai access, and it leaves you with no senior tech people. Instead, you give it access, but only give senior tech people access to the AI. Ones who would know to tell the AI to have a backup of the database, one designed to not let you delete it without multiple people signing off.
Senior tech people aren’t going to spend thier time trying things an AI needs tried to find the solution. So if you don’t give it access, they won’t use it, and eventually they will all be gone. Then you are even further up shit creek than you are now.
The answer overall, is smarter people talking to the AI, and guardrails to stop a single point of failure. The later is nothing new.
Do you go on an oncall rotation by chance? Because anyone that has to respond to night time pages would not be saying this lol.
What is this insane rambling?
The alternative is that the only thing with access to make changes in your production environment is the CI pipeline that deploys your production environment.
Neither the AI, nor anything else on the developers machine, should have access to make production changes.
What are you even talking about?
Nah. As a tech people, I am not going to give an llm write access to anything in production, period
The answer is no AI. It’s really simple. The costs for ai are not worth the output.
I’m in favour of hiring kids to figure out the solution through iteration and doing web searches etc. If they fuck up, then they learn and eventually become better at their job - maybe even becoming a Senior themselves eventually.
I get what you’re saying - Seniors are more likely to use the tools more effectively, but there are many cases of the AI not doing what its told. Its not repeatably consistent like a bash script.
People are better - always.
No risk, no reward. People are desperate for these tools to help them success.
Success bigly, even.