“Mistakenly, we thought that by just introducing artificial intelligence and adjusting the design requirements that we had, that that would produce a high-quality product,” said Charles Poon, VP of vehicle hardware engineering, in a briefing this week with reporters.
Time for another edition of “stupid or liar”
“Mistakenly, we thought that by just introducing artificial intelligence and adjusting the design requirements that we had, that that would produce a high-quality product,” said Charles Poon, VP of vehicle hardware engineering
Years ago I worked at an ISP tgat went through a merger. They decided they were going to outsource customer service to another company.
We all got nice severances and 3 months prior notice where we basically didn’t work because all calls were being routed to the new call center and we were just backup. What a great 3 months. We had card tourneys, spun up the companies old game servers and ran minecraft (alpha) on them, lots of fun.
Get laid off, fast forward a year and the outsource company has taken an 86% approval ratimg down to the low 30s.
They hired a lot of us back to completely rebuild the service department. I was tier 1 and got a 76% raise. I imagine others got better.
I bet the executives who made the decision gave themselves a bonus and are still working there despite the monumental blunder.
Executives fail upwards.
There can be value in having learned things the hard way. The decisions I made that resulted in melted piles of scrap really seared themselves into my memory, and help me make better decisions around those systems going forward.
Unfortunately, our corporate systems aren’t great at distinguishing people who gained valuable lessons from people who don’t recognize they screwed up.
According to Poon, some of the company’s most experienced personnel left before all of their accumulated knowledge could be fully transferred into Ford’s automated systems. That necessitated bringing back some of those employees to retrain those systems…
See this, nothing was learned by these slop-shits. Their take away wasn’t humans-with-experience > than slop-bots. It was, unfortunately, ‘we didn’t extract enough knowledge from the humans that helped build our company before tossing as many humans away as possible. Once we’ve extracted enough, we’ll try again.’
Fuck you poon and co.
Funny how the capitalist narrative is that the CEO types “deserve” all they get because they worked hard and “built the company”, but employee’s that’ve been equally there for it’s hardship and growth, actually with their hands in the mud, actually have all the practical knowledge, yet are only on an income, are tossed aside at the nearest convenience because somebody smelled a bit more money.
Some of them really can’t be arsed to give back the community and systems that allowed them to flourish in the first place can they.
Locust swarm.
Sometimes I feel so blessed working for somebody that actually values people.
even if they can “put all the knowledge” in the LLM, its unlikely the thing would even be able to use it effectively without the same engineers anyways.
Let’s hope the humans learned their lesson and won’t teach the systems.
The point the grandparent comment is making is that there is no amount of teaching that will turn an LLM into a top engineer. The technology just isn’t there yet, not until OpenAI replaces all their own engineers.
ROFL that was not a mistake. They all knew what would happen.
yup, they just got caught doing it.
Can’t blame AI for the fact that I know of at least 2 Ford transit vans whose turbo blew within 6 months 5 years ago, and a ranger with oil leaks
The only thing keeping ford in business here in Australia (other than the mustang), are the yobbos who want to believe Chy-na is producing bad cars still.
They’ve been producing crap for decades
They set the gas line like 3" above the turbo exhaust on the first Gen escape apparently not the 1st Gen but yeah (that doesn’t even have a turbo 🤦🏼♀️)
Can’t blame AI for the fact that I know of at least 2 Ford transit vans whose turbo blew within 6 months 5 years ago, and a ranger with oil leaks
I made an interesting observation - I see small oil leaks more frequently than when I made my driving license in 1988. In both cases, living in an European suburb. No idea why … perhaps it is because people have more cars and drive less? Or changes in car design and construction?
The ranger with oil leaks I think was burning oil. It needed regular oil refilling until it was fixed.
My jeep is also hot garbage too
So they fired the executives responsible, right?
Lol. Probably got bonuses then celebrated for identifying the issue and fixing it.
No matter what, the parasites in the big club always fail upwards.
*Underpaying someone else to fix it.
Can we start replacing executives with AI? Big money savings there, and you don’t even need a particularly good model
if anything the hallucinations will likely be less ridiculous
I’d settle for regular old I
All CEOs do is mindlessly follow trends; perfect use case for AI.
Could probably get the job done with a half-decent flowchart, really.
The CEOs already have and are getting paid to copy paste responses.
fire her for being caught for not OBFUSCATING THE lay offs as something else.
Executives make some major mistakes but never seem to be held accountable.
Probably invested more in AI.
“We’re moving from that find-and-fix mentality to preventing issues before they occur,” […]
Funny that the introduction of AI in software development generally means a shift into the other direction. As John Ousterhout called it, “debugging a system into existence”.
And they’re going to fire Charles Poon for fucking this up, right?
Mr.Poon is known for fucking things…
Mistakenly, we thought that by just introducing artificial intelligence and adjusting the design requirements that we had, that that would produce a high-quality product
That’s so low IQ, like saying “Mistakenly, we thought that by just introducing a lawn mower and adjust the landscaping requirements, that that would produce a high quality lawn.”
Hopefully those employees said, “Sure, I’ll come back, but my salary requirement is 50% more than you were paying me.”
I always thought it was a joke until it happened to friends of mine. Massive layoffs, they were experts in one specific technology, they came back as consultants for a few years with a doubled salary. They were fired again later, but with a lot more money so it was worth it.
It would be great if all the workers would agree on this collectively, rather than just one offs.
In the current job market, you know it was the other way round.
Seems like we’re entering the “find out” phase…
If only…
Firing a large group of people and re-hiring a subset at reduced rates is a standard business practice used to keep wages down. This wasn’t a mistake in policy, it was a clumsy execution.
Or perhaps a little bit of both: an inelegant way to handle a mistake.
We definitely are in some ways, but I don’t think this applies. Just the past month I’ve seen several articles about companies doing real work on scaling back AI use, which is good. But a bigger number are still fully invested and everyone who has any say about it have such an extreme AI psychosis that the companies, and possibly themselves, won’t survive.
That’s such a dumb fucking quote. Imagine being a stockholder and reading that sentence spouted from someone at the helm of the company.
Kick rocks, wet socks.
They’ll never hear that though, they’ll hear what the want to hear, both via the people at the company and their own brain filter. Then they might see this and other articles but that doesn’t matter because they’re so far down in the hole of AI psychosis.
Your thinking like a logical person…not a sycophant with an entitled attitude to their gains.
Jim Farley says a lot of stupid shit to the press.
HAHAHAHA
I’ve been using an LLM for programming for last 6mo and it needs constant babysitting. It’s basically something that just does the most straightforward thing without consideration of nuance, maintainability or whether to actually split into a module. This is very much not surprising.
Yeah, I use it for some programming tasks as well. I’m sick and tired of telling it that it did something wrong or simply omitted something, only to have it apologize and offer to fix its own mistakes.
The major problem is that the work of an LLM has a massive number of hidden ‘assumptions’ that you need to be aware of. If you don’t already have a good working knowledge of the task you wont have an intuition about those assumptions. It’s annoying.
Yeah, like cards being the best thing ever on front-end. If I want a basic layout I put “avoid cards” usually because then it’ll use them sparingly. But yeah, it’s just autocomplete so it’s always going to get the lowest common denominator code based on what it decided to look at.
I’m now looking into finding something faster than GPT/Claude where I can ping pong prompt faster and get what I want. Whatever it writes first is just a first draft anyway.
You should be glad it’s apologizing. On the occasions I’ve used it to try to actually write code for me it’s had a tendency to blame me for its mistakes.
It writes a function that gets stuck in an infinitely recursive loop that never exits, I point it out and it’s all “Aha! You’ve fallen for a classic recursion trap!” What do you mean I’ve fallen for it?
Between those experiences and seeing the hot garbage some of my coworkers vibe coded, it was enough for me to relegate LLMs purely to the “ask questions that you would have searched for on StackOverflow” role. And it frustrates me that search was made so impotent that it’s not a real option to avoid the LLM entirely. The multiple answers and perspectives on SO were often really valuable.
Yep. I realized that the best use case is just using a LLM as a supercharged StackOverflow, where answers are based on my specific problem.
I just use it as chat, have it configured to give me at least two options as answer, better three. Then I feel still in charge. And if I like a proposed solution I only take it over line by line and tweak it to my liking. So I still “wrote” the code and would rightfully feel responsible for the result (again, like I used StackOverflow).
Never ever would I let it go rampage as agent on my codebase. That’s terrible 😱.
VP should be fired.
