Yeah, this is more likely to not waste engineers time while dipshits vibe code their own "tools" and demand that they are production ready despite being said dipshit.

I've been lucky enough to never work with engineers who take offense at rough sketches, specs, or prototypes.

There's a spectrum, right?

On one end of the spectrum you've got presumably you, who brings a sketch or prototype to engineering, and has a reasonable discussion about what can or cannot be made production ready on what timeline, with what budget.

On the other end you've got people who bring a half baked prototype to a couple engineers, demand it be in production next week, and then escalate and make a big scene when there's pushback.

No engineers tend to complain about the former. The latter is stressful as hell

It's fine if everyone realizes they are rough sketches, specs, or prototypes. But programmers have hubris, developed through many years of writing shitty code they have to burn to the ground. Other professionals often don't have that hubris. The power of writing code goes straight to their head. Programmers are trying to write the least code possible to do what they need to do, because they know every single line is a liability. A company liability, and a personal liability, because they're the one that will have to fix it when things go wrong. I think people who are not programmers don't always understand that, and they are extra isolated from it because ultimately they don't maintain or fix their stuff. Some other poor soul does, so out of sight out of mind.

It requires both sides to play nice. Engineers have to be relaxed about it but the folks asking engineers for things need to accept that it's not as simple as the prototype may make it seem. If there is mutual understanding and respect things go well. If there is any hint of us vs them mentality, it goes sideways.

the take away is that Ai enhances expertise rather than making experts out of everyone or replacing them

> Has nothing to do with AI being bad. Good engineers have a mind for it

I never like these kinds of statements because it makes so AI can’t ever be critiqued. You can always go “well that’s a bad engineer.”

It does make sense. But the problem is that no one wants to spend a few trillion dollars on a nice tool for devs. The investors want the magic wish-granting genie they were promised.[1]

1.https://www.the-independent.com/tech/chatgpt-ai-cancer-cure-...

> There. Now only devs can use Claude Code. That makes sense.

This hardly makes sense to me. Claude Code is an excellent tool for running your environment and augmenting your productivity. Most traders are sharp folks who could use CC to great effect I am sure. I'd be super annoyed.

Erm why are you so defensive?

There’s plenty of firms out there claiming sales people can create all sorts of productivity apps…