Debate rando[Numbers] about AI (or something) - Certified Sperg Contaiment Thread

[DumbDude43]

If you seriously think SWE doesn't have established standards

if whatever standards you are envisioning were actually established (as in, most people actually adhered to them) then you probably wouldn't be in here demanding authority to step in and make people follow standards properly lol

like there's people who treat the agile manifesto like religious dogma and bob martins 'clean code' book as gospel, but it's not that uncommon either to meet someone who thinks "OOP bad" because forcing so much encapsulation and abstraction is just bloat that inflates your codebase with unnecessary complexity

whatever consensus you think exists, it's a lot less universally accepted than you believe, and trying to enshrine it into some binding set of standards or certifications for the field is not going to work very well

 

[Polyarmory]

Non-government standardization already exists. This is why I bring up IEEE and SWEBOK. It's exactly what they've been pushing for since the 1990's while ACM takes the stance that non should exist with the same lame arguments that tech evolves.... we KNOW.

Are you going to say that the construction industry doesn't evolve? That OSHA standards don't change or laws aren't changing every minute of the day?

Read SWEBOK and you see how basic and generalized it is, but still manages to cover topics that most developers don't understand. But that is minimum knowledge.

I think it should be regulated by the fact that some people need to have licenses taken away. And that there should be a formal definition and entry to what a software engineer is.

It doesn't have to be hard, you don't have to continuously update tests to ensure half of people fail like AWS does, but SWE even at the lowest level isn't for the average gooner. Those people need to be filtered out, and we need to ensure people have to renew certification continuously instead of riding on maintenance mode giving more work to contractors or causing high turnover rates.

There is a BIG difference between a best practices guide with some vocabulary and a set of rules clear and simple enough that they can be reliably and usefully enforced by government drones. I agree with pretty much everything else you're saying, but I don't think you really grasp just how messy and counterproductive such a rule set would be.

Consider also that technologies tend to come from companies, and that the government has gotten in bed with Microsoft, Oracle, and Cisco plenty of times, and frankly I think it's patently obvious that such a body of rules would just be "use XYZ corp's stuff or you're an irresponsible cowboy coder who endangers innocent lives with your callous disregard for best practices."

 

[rando[Numbers]]

if whatever standards you are envisioning were actually established (as in, most people actually adhered to them) then you probably wouldn't be in here demanding authority to step in and make people follow standards properly lol

like there's people who treat the agile manifesto like religious dogma and bob martins 'clean code' book as gospel, but it's not that uncommon either to meet someone who thinks "OOP bad" because forcing so much encapsulation and abstraction is just bloat that inflates your codebase with unnecessary complexity

whatever consensus you think exists, it's a lot less universally accepted than you believe, and trying to enshrine it into some binding set of standards or certifications for the field is not going to work very well

If you're still bitching about agile and OOP you're still too retarded to do the job. If you're think that's what I'm talking about you the average bot replaceable gooner

 

[⋖ cørdion ⋗]

OP's post is ai generated.

AI can make good enough art sometimes -- when it doesn't make eldritch abominations -- despite delusions that AI art is "never real art" and is "always soulless" and is "art theft". That said, writing prompts and getting AI art does not make one an artist. And other than art, the Current Year AI trend is annoying so far to me. From the "answers" on search engines, to that unnatural dialog when trying to imitate human speech, to robocall scam BS, to lobotomized "ChatGPT" that gives SJW-approved "answers" and results.

Like I said, AI should sound like 20th century scifi robots.

AI has made great porn, videos too, for fucking ages. The whole "6 fingers" thing lasted all of a month, but it's easier to be quiet about the constant advances than to give it any attention if you spend all day seething in your loos about uh.. AI art? A more niche market than mongolian pottery.

 

[The Ugly One]

Exactly. Or they wouldn't bother trying just because it means study.

I didn't encounter truly retarded jeets until I flipped from normal engineering to software. This gave me a false impression of the average jeet's competence. I strongly suspect the existence of a domestically administered competency exam filtered the worst ones out.

if whatever standards you are envisioning were actually established (as in, most people actually adhered to them) then you probably wouldn't be in here demanding authority to step in and make people follow standards properly lol

like there's people who treat the agile manifesto like religious dogma and bob martins 'clean code' book as gospel, but it's not that uncommon either to meet someone who thinks "OOP bad" because forcing so much encapsulation and abstraction is just bloat that inflates your codebase with unnecessary complexity

whatever consensus you think exists, it's a lot less universally accepted than you believe, and trying to enshrine it into some binding set of standards or certifications for the field is not going to work very well

We already apply engineering license standards to computer engineers. You can't design chips in America unless you pass a pretty high bar of competence. Most of what we apply to chips could be applied to software as well. To get your PE license as a computer engineer, you have to pass an exam that includes questions on

1. Software design (e.g., structured programming, design methodologies, statetransition diagrams, requirements definition, fault tolerance, safety criticalsoftware, model-based systems engineering, development of security operations)
2. Quality assurance (e.g., testing, reviews and inspections, safety and security,validation and verification, root cause analysis)
3. Software fundamentals (e.g., data structures, algorithms, handshaking andsynchronization, control flow constructs)
4. Development tools (e.g., debuggers, disassemblers and assemblers, trace tools,emulators, static analysis tools, code repositories)
5. Machine learning/artificial intelligence

The exam is only offered once a year in a controlled environment. Plus you need a 4-year degree from an accredited institution, 4 years of work under a PE, and the basic technical exam. If we held devs to the same standards, it would filter out nearly all the jeets.

https://ncees.org/wp-content/uploads/2025/01/FINAL_PE-Electrical_Computer_Oct_2025.pdf

 

[Super Mario Brothers]

AI has made great porn, videos too, for fucking ages.

Most unbelievable sentence in this whole thread.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

These kids who have never worked another skilled job don't know what that term means. I can imagine how shocking it is to go from engineering to software. Nobody on a team any clue what they're doing. Just making it up as they go.

In 2019 companies were hiring any cum rag that applied. That's the people who have 6 years experience now. Coincidentally I see job application experience requirements go up every year. It went from 6+ to 7+ in the last year for senior positions.

Because the number of people that realized you could get in by spamming recruiters all day and doing to basic leetcode questions that appeared in 2019 is.... now the majority of the industry.

And the people interested in knowing the job are increasingly giving up.

 

[Miracle-]

These kids who have never worked another skilled job don't know what that term means. I can imagine how shocking it is to go from engineering to software. Nobody on a team any clue what they're doing. Just making it up as they go.

In 2019 companies were hiring any cum rag that applied. That's the people who have 6 years experience now. Coincidentally I see job application experience requirements go up every year. It went from 6+ to 7+ in the last year for senior positions.

Because the number of people that realized you could get in by spamming recruiters all day and doing to basic leetcode questions that appeared in 2019 is.... now the majority of the industry.

And the people interested in knowing the job are increasingly giving up.

The irony is, as an employer of ~35 devs, I still maintain that the most effective interview method by far is taking a candidate for dinner or going for a walk and talking to them about random topics that have nothing to do with anything they've prepared for, or even technology for that matter.

Then, if I'm still unsure, take a video game that they don't know (Factorio, Age of Empires, Dota, whatever) and you play the game but you ask them for their input about what you should do/strategy.

It is the the most effective method (and least stressful for everyone) by far. I've never made a hire I regretted using that method.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

The irony is, as an employer of ~35 devs, I still maintain that the most effective interview method by far is taking a candidate for dinner or going for a walk and talking to them about random topics that have nothing to do with anything they've prepared for, or even technology for that matter.

Then, if I'm still unsure, take a video game that they don't know (Factorio, Age of Empires, Dota, whatever) and you play the game but you ask them for their input about what you should do/strategy.

It is the the most effective method (and least stressful for everyone) by far. I've never made a hire I regretted using that method.

When you get to around 100+ this kind of thing doesn't work anymore. When you try to build on personality alone it doesn't scale.

One people need to learn to work with different cultures. You can't have a company with one "culture." That's not how it works, it is by definition exclusive.

Two you'll hit an employee Dunbar number, if you want to be affective you have to start learning structure and formal process.

Little companies always say how these things work great. But when they start to grow suddenly all the cult members hired to be friends are complaining about how it isn't fun anymore and new people are more often immediately seen as a threat to the "culture."

I've seen multiple get stuck at that 100 number and start to depend heavily on contract teams because they can't keep anyone full time past that.

 

[Miracle-]

When you get to around 100+ this kind of thing doesn't work anymore. When you try to build on personality alone it doesn't scale.

One people need to learn to work with different cultures. You can't have a company with one "culture." That's not how it works, it is by definition exclusive.

Two you'll hit an employee Dunbar number, if you want to be affective you have to start learning structure and formal process.

Little companies always say how these things work great. But when they start to grow suddenly all the cult members hired to be friends are complaining about how it isn't fun anymore and new people are more often immediately seen as a threat to the "culture."

I've seen multiple get stuck at that 100 number and start to depend heavily on contract teams because they can't keep anyone full time past that.

Without going into specifics, that's not an issue. We have organised the structure specifically to get around the Dunbar number problem.

We're not a normal business in that we aren't a cult at all, I don't hire fanatics, and we've been going since 2015. I also wouldn't say it's built around personality.

But I share your overall view, we organised this way explicitly because of my terrible experiences at other companies.

 

[Miracle-]

Anyway, back to the OP topic:

 

[DeadwastePrime]

AI has made great porn, videos too, for fucking ages

ai videos are fucking with the site i use to goon to. they look like shit and there's dozens within the first few pages. granted, the site has some other issues as well (why tf is there a roblox porn section in the categories tab?), but this aint helping either

 

[rando[Numbers]]

Anyway, back to the OP topic:

The original core was the fact that AI has magnified these traditional issues with software industry. Vibe coding and the marketing of AI companies have given incompetent developers the confidence to act like they know everything. But what they’re doing is gooning on AI, taking dopamine hits over doing real work.

The industry has had a lack of engineers for decades, but it was a recognized problem. Now conversation is flooded around "vibe coding," which felt like sarcasm from the beginning, and companies are investing in it. It’s 10 steps backwards, and they won’t realize it for years because the incompetent can put a plank across water and walk across it, but they can’t build a bridge.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

AI has made great porn, videos too, for fucking ages.

You might need an intervention.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

There is a BIG difference between a best practices guide with some vocabulary and a set of rules clear and simple enough that they can be reliably and usefully enforced by government drones. I agree with pretty much everything else you're saying, but I don't think you really grasp just how messy and counterproductive such a rule set would be.

Consider also that technologies tend to come from companies, and that the government has gotten in bed with Microsoft, Oracle, and Cisco plenty of times, and frankly I think it's patently obvious that such a body of rules would just be "use XYZ corp's stuff or you're an irresponsible cowboy coder who endangers innocent lives with your callous disregard for best practices."

You’re making HUGE assumptions here that don’t exist. Law is far messier than software could ever possibly be. Software is not so super uniquely special that it can’t do with testing people before they’re allowed to handle personal data and be relied on by billion-dollar companies. Software is by definition more precise than every other industry, it is far easier to regulate than any other. Does that mean gray area? Yes. Does it mean loose standards? Yes. Does it mean the sneaky Microsoft is gonna' clip your nuts off? What?

At first I didn’t want to mention it outright because this isn’t a congressional hearing and I’m not trying to be too prescriptive. But since no one bothered to look it up, here’s what SWEBOK covers and tests for.

1. Software Requirements
2. Software Architecture
3. Software Design
4. Software Construction ← Average derp head barely knows this alone
5. Software Testing
6. Software Engineering Operations
7. Software Maintenance
8. Software Configuration Management
9. Software Engineering Management
10. Software Engineering Process
11. Software Engineering Models and Methods
12. Software Quality
13. Software Security
14. Software Engineering Professional Practice
15. Software Engineering Economics
16. Computing Foundations
17. Mathematical Foundations
18. Engineering Foundations

It doesn’t give a shit about your favorite programming language, it doesn’t tell you you have to do "ooga booga Agile!" It is, in fact, easier to read and learn than OSHA because OSHA gives specific measurements for a lot of safety standards. No such thing exists in this book.

Software developers enjoy an unprecedented level of spoiledness, and it shows. The vibe coding trend is only tripling down on the lack of discipline. Which means more contractors will have to be hired to fix more "full time" devs mistakes. And those contractors, who know exactly what the problem is and how to solve it, are usually coming from a very basic software engineering perspective and have probably worked with a dozen languages and methodologies in the past year alone.

Why do you think developers should not have to prove they know what they’re doing and instead depend on someone wiping their ass?

 

[pollution jim]

You’ll either adapt and learn to use it, or you’ll be a quaint anecdote in the next century’s history book about people who thought progress was optional.

I'll have to disagree with you on this one. Art is not like industry where you'd have to use the most updated technology for your business to function. Some people will choose to not use AI just like some people will choose to paint on a real canvas or piece of paper, or photograph real life. If you'd call a painter a failure because they can't keep up with all of the AI trash that gets pumped out daily then you are looking at it in terms of quantity over quality. For large projects like movies and video games I'm sure it would be of some use to save on time and money, but if's a one-man job or a hobby I can't imagine everyone would relinquish so much control to a robot who will create the most average thing you can describe with words.

 

[Polyarmory]

Why do you think developers should not have to prove they know what they’re doing and instead depend on someone wiping their ass?

Software developers enjoy an unprecedented level of spoiledness, and it shows.

Waaaah! Wahhh!!! Cry harder faggot lmao. Did a COBOL programmer fuck your grandma? Did some Javascript jeet steal your dog? Why is this so personal to you?

All I'm saying is that I've met people personally who maintain Windows 95 software on medical equipment that could kill people if it gets hacked, and the reason that vulnerability exists is government regulation. I see no reason to think anyone in the government gives a shit about IEEE SWEBOK or anything else like it, and I do see reason to expect corruption and incompetence. Though I'll grant you that PCI compliance does probably save us all from a lot of identify theft, even if pretty much every developer has seen it fucked up at least once (even when using something like Stripe which is supposed to completely eliminate the problem.)

Admittedly, some professional standards would be really nice, would improve life for decent developers, and would be a solution that works despite the opaque nature of proprietary software, but I'm skeptical that it would be done well.

Also, stop doubleposting; it's against the forum's etiquette.

ETA: "More precise than any other industry"
What planet do you live on? In software, there are a thousand ways to express anything, and they all have their own subtle differences in implementation that properly learning any one of them takes time. And all those ways to express things change as the underlying hardware and software change, so even if you narrow your consideration down to a small number of widely used standards, the foundation they exist on is very unstable. Other industries tend to be a lot more mature than software, which has only really been an industry for 70 years, as opposed to the thousands of years people have been making clothes and buildings and bridges and stuff. You happen to live in a shitty time for software quality. You can be mad at fate, or simply accept the inadequacy of the world, and maybe try to improve it instead of just fantasizing about preposterous silver bullets.

 

[rando[Numbers]]

Waaaah! Wahhh!!! Cry harder faggot lmao. Did a COBOL programmer fuck your grandma? Did some Javascript jeet steal your dog? Why is this so personal to you?

All I'm saying is that I've met people personally who maintain Windows 95 software on medical equipment that could kill people if it gets hacked, and the reason that vulnerability exists is government regulation. I see no reason to think anyone in the government gives a shit about IEEE SWEBOK or anything else like it, and I do see reason to expect corruption and incompetence. Though I'll grant you that PCI compliance does probably save us all from a lot of identify theft, even if pretty much every developer has seen it fucked up at least once (even when using something like Stripe which is supposed to completely eliminate the problem.)

Admittedly, some professional standards would be really nice, would improve life for decent developers, and would be a solution that works despite the opaque nature of proprietary software, but I'm skeptical that it would be done well.

Also, stop doubleposting; it's against the forum's etiquette.

Get a little upset because you vomited some regurgitated bullshit that didn’t address the topic at all and got called on how retarded you are? You can’t think critically so you have a cute little temper tantrum when people notice you can't read?

 

[Polyarmory]

Get a little upset because you vomited some regurgitated bullshit that didn’t address the topic at all and got called on how retarded you are? You can’t think critically so you have a cute little temper tantrum when people notice you can't read?

Perhaps neither of us is really reading the other, because it seems to me that you are refusing to address my central argument:

It's not that competent regulation can't be made. It's that it won't be. The people who would be responsible for creating and enforcing the regulation would probably be congressmen and lobbyists, and they fuck up everything else they touch, so why is software some special thing they would get right? Why would lobbyists give a shit about IEEE SWEBOK or anything else?

 

[rando[Numbers]]

Consider also that technologies tend to come from companies, and that the government has gotten in bed with Microsoft, Oracle, and Cisco plenty of times, and frankly I think it's patently obvious that such a body of rules would just be "use XYZ corp's stuff or you're an irresponsible cowboy coder who endangers innocent lives with your callous disregard for best practices."

This is fully ignorant. It makes no sense. 1. Standard organizations like IEEE, ACM, ISO, Ecma International, W3C and others do not operate on this paradigm and don’t benefit from it. These are either international bodies or 501(c)(3)'s. A bar exam to be a lawyer is not some corrupt horrid process where the regulators make millions pushing their agendas. This doesn’t make any sense.

And two, standardized exams are not equivalent to Microsoft Learn or AWS Training. These programs, which allow contracting companies to be displayed on their stores if they have so many employees with certification, have their own system for making money.

You’re conflating the two. And assuming that just because a standard exam and licensing could exist, than that necessarily means being forced to "use XYZ corp’s stuff." Where is the evidence of that?

This is why I don’t think you’re parsing the recommendation.