Post #4160678
2026-07-28 10:12 UTC
Replies (13)
-
@energisch_@troet.cafe 2026-07-28 10:23
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe some people... 🙂↔️
-
@oxy@social.bsdlab.au 2026-07-28 10:30
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe sounds like a job for @davidgerard@circumstances.run 's proposed Slop Cleanup Crew™
-
@oxy@social.bsdlab.au 2026-07-28 11:46
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe new product idea: Stef-AI-no Bot. For when your clients want AI but also want Stefano
-
@stux@mstdn.social 2026-07-28 13:11
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe Holy shit.. That required some digital balls right there :amaze: I do not have the patience you have sir, my respect!
-
@rozenglass@fedi.dreamscape.link 2026-07-28 13:20
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe Slowly, more and more of my critical response calls end up tracing their root cause back to some random LLM slop changes that someone working at the client thought they can just shove in important places without them knowing what they're doing. I'm also having to condition my support contracts on not having the client use LLMs in the parts they need my help with, because I really have better things to do with my life than try to understand what a statistical word generator threw up at random hours of the night. I was starting to doubt the market utility of my skills as the LLM hype was growing, but as the it keeps going I find that the fear mongering does not reflect reality at all on the ground, in my consulting experience so far. The popular sentiment is starting to feel more like fanatical faith than a technological reality. Perhaps this the effect of a massive number of people going all-in on a fundamentally shaky bet, with their finances and their reputations, so the more the tech shows signs of falling short of the expectation, the louder those invested in the movement preach of doom and missing out and falling behind and various other woes. As if we all believed hard enough, and prayed hard enough, the machine gods will finally bring forth the new age, in which their risky bets makes them the magical winners. Humans are quite interesting.
-
@zleap@techhub.social 2026-07-28 10:23
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe It seems there is no hope with some people, too many people seem to be shouting about AI being the solution to all problems and a major job killer, reading your post I get the opposite impression. I hardly use AI, but then I don't need to look much up, if I do I find what i want with a search engine, BUT am usually looking for specific sources of information. For example there was an interesting physics article in one of the papers, so in an effort to try and find more info I undertook a duckduckgo search and found info on phys.org and arxiv.org both to me useful and importantly more reliable sources, many of the items that came up were for other newspaper articles. I sometimes feel I am some sort of exception to what others are doing.
-
@simonzerafa@infosec.exchange 2026-07-28 14:22
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe Well it's rude whatever else you call it 🙄🤦♂️
-
@packet@mastodon.bsd.cafe 2026-07-28 10:13
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe that's ridiculous
-
@thehole@dasforum.org 2026-07-28 10:16
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe Now I'm interested in the client's answer
-
@mat3@chaos.social 2026-07-28 10:23
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe Just to clarify the situation: you were contracted by them to manage $x and provide support if anything breaks; they then think to themselves: hmm, lets us """AI""" to do the support for $x, dont have/want to pay the money for """AI'""" therefore ask you for the money to pay for it and, after that failed, are falling back to you providing support?
-
@nemokamui@infosec.exchange 2026-07-28 20:24
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe just add a line item to the invoice for “you’re fucking idiots” with the appropriate compensation.
-
@johntimaeus@infosec.exchange 2026-07-29 04:06
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe No. If you have any out on the agreement that doesn't cost you your business, end it completely. They are not the same company you began negotiations or signed a contract with. A full renegotiation is a good place to start, with a dedicated 'real human' clause, and a base rate of 150% last rate...plus a minimum retainer of what they spent last year. For the real human clause. The new rate is last year hourly * 1.5. Correcting any issues with a root or contributing cause traceable to the use of LLMs or any other form of generative "Ai" will be billed at twice new rate, plus a base callout fee of two hours as the complexity of resolving problems created by an unexplainable algorithm are at least twice as hard.
-
@tamoshius@river.group.lt 2026-07-29 18:51
@stefano@mastodon.bsd.cafe a new payment plan (much more expensive) for sorting the AI mess ?