This reads quite similarly to the thesis of Cory Doctorow's recent 'reverse centaur' book on AI, if you're interested in similar takes

The problem is that the things on the left are legitimately less valuable than the things on the right to most people. The target audience will eat it up, but why should anyone who isn't a developer care? This entire thing fails to explain it's value to anyone who isn't already convinced.

For example -

You make more money if you deliver quickly than you do if you have "accountability." What even is accountability, how do I explain it to a CEO? Is this office speak for blame? Is the idea to know who to yell at so you can feel better, or to make money? Feelings don't sell widgets.

"Human dignity and control" - Who is this valuable to? Not consumers, they want Walmart prices. Not companies, they want Walmart profits. What's in it for them?

If this isn't how you sell it, then there's no way to sell it. This doesn't just apply to AI-generated software. We're living in an age where all companies realized that taking the road that makes the most money immediately with no other considerations is better than strange ideas like quality, brand perception or ethics. It's the same reason why luxury brands are stooping down to nickel-and-dime their customers, why all digital services rush to integrate gambling or predatory loan schemes into their products, why every blank space is used for advertising without regard for appearances or cohesion, why even historically 'refined' companies are happy to abuse their consumers, why physical products in almost all segments get downgraded, shrunken down and cheapened. If it adds anything to the next quarter's profit, then it's the only way. The most horrifying thing is that consumers seem to love it and have nearly no limit to how much they're willing to tolerate, people who care about the worsening of everything are seen as a tiny minority of weirdos. Maybe eventually the trend reverses once the world becomes totally unlivable, but I'm not holding my breath. Vibe coding was made for the modern world, it's the most extreme caricature of what we value.

> If this isn't how you sell it, then there's no way to sell it. T

I disagree. Nothing you said is wrong, really, but like most good things in society change requires cooperation. To get that you have to consider other peoples perspectives. Language is for communication. So what are we trying to communicate and how do we do it effectively?

First decide who it is you're trying to convince, and then target the message that they need to hear. Don't lie, just choose the most compelling argument for that audience. People have a finite amount of attention and won't sit through a lecture that's clearly not meant for their ears.

For example, we might rephrase it in terms of reliability when talking to engineers, or into the business advantages of being able to introduce new features faster when humans understand the codebase for an executive. Just figure out who it is that needs convincing the most, and explain to them why it benefits them.

Right now this is just rabble rousing. It feels like the goal is to convince those who are already angry that they should be even angrier. To what purpose though? Everyone is angry, and the world doesn't need more. What it needs is to channel that anger into something useful or, more productively, to start helping to convince those who aren't already.

If your CEO doesn't know what accountability is, you may be working for Betsy Sherlock. /s

If you do not value human dignity, naturally none of this matters. I do not judge people who need Walmart prices, I judge people who prefer they have more regardless of what that does to others. Companies simply need boundaries, that's what the government is for, defense of the common good in the face of people pursuing their individual ones.

Selling it is good, but the point is to be able to articulate it to yourself before you package it up in various forms for others.