Yeah, it is way worse than that. In the past two days, I have had two separate non-engineer team members ask some AI agent how some mobile bug should be fixed and posted the AI response in the ticket as the main content and context and acceptance criteria. I then had to waste my time reading this crap (because this is really all that is in the ticket) before starting my own efforts to understand what the real ask or change in behavior needed is.
Our leader wrote himself a great prompt to fill up Tickets in jira with useless text too and our boss is happy like if he won the lottery. Now instead of ugly but short useful texts now i have yo read a fucking eassay!!!
You were supposed to feed it back into the lying machine to dustill the content from the vapor, not read it. You are not AI native worker and should be kicked out of the otherwise great performing team
No you don't. Feed the essay to Claude and ask it to summarize it for you, or just use the Jira MCP and have Claude or codex take the ticket, use the GitHub MCP to get it the source, have it go work on the ticket, have it generate the code, generate some unit tests, then you go literally yell at your computer using Wispr Flow or some other transcription software to tell Claude how to fix the mess it made, and then you after you've cleaned it up, you submit the PR.
When ChatGPT first came out three years ago, we joked about Devin and having an AI coworker, but I was just given 5 tickets to work on before break, and damned if AI didn't take a well scoped ticket and just did it before I even finished reading that very tightly scoped ticket.
While I personally find that generative AI has helped me be more productive and even boosted my ability to learn things, I really _dislike_ that we’ve normalized this behavior:
Whether a Jira ticket, an email, a yearly review, we feed bullet points into a black box to get a bunch of fluffy text. On the other end, we feed the fluffy text into the black box to get bullet points.
We’re killing penguins because we’re somehow afraid to just send the simplified bullet points to each other in the first place.
You close the ticket and ping the manager of the nontechnical person submitting the ticket. Then you have a discussion with management about the arrangement and expectations. If it doesn't go well you polish your resume.
1) has the savings such that they aren't a wage slave (applies to any income level)
2) has any dignity
People willingly put themselves in situations where they have no autonomy and no options by living their entire lives paycheck to paycheck or close enough to not make a difference.
That’s a pretty judgmental take. The only people with dignity in your formulation are independently wealthy.
If I stomped out the door as soon as I had to curb my tongue, I would never build the social and reputational capital required to be effective on bigger projects, and those are fun (to me).
We're in tech and this shit is happening in big tech companies. Yes, there's many of us who are not getting those wages but every one of them is independently wealthy.
Regardless, you are not a slave. Have a backbone. If you do not stand up for yourself you make it harder for others to do so. Your actions don't just affect you.
Worse yet, these were done by the managers of the Marketing team and the Mapping team. Plus, these are high profile issues that (somehow) required getting the CEO involved too! (Obviously there is a lot of dysfunction in our organization, lol.)
