this post was submitted on 22 Dec 2024
302 points (98.4% liked)

Asklemmy

44152 readers
1222 users here now

A loosely moderated place to ask open-ended questions

Search asklemmy 🔍

If your post meets the following criteria, it's welcome here!

  1. Open-ended question
  2. Not offensive: at this point, we do not have the bandwidth to moderate overtly political discussions. Assume best intent and be excellent to each other.
  3. Not regarding using or support for Lemmy: context, see the list of support communities and tools for finding communities below
  4. Not ad nauseam inducing: please make sure it is a question that would be new to most members
  5. An actual topic of discussion

Looking for support?

Looking for a community?

~Icon~ ~by~ ~@Double_A@discuss.tchncs.de~

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Short disclosure, I work as a Software Developer in the US, and often have to keep my negative opinions about the tech industry to myself. I often post podcasts and articles critical of the tech industry here in order to vent and, in a way, commiserate over the current state of tech and its negative effects on our environment and the Global/American sociopolitical landscape.

I'm generally reluctant to express these opinions IRL as I'm afraid of burning certain bridges in the tech industry that could one day lead to further employment opportunities. I also don't want to get into these kinds of discussions except with my closest friends and family, as I could foresee them getting quite heated and lengthy with certain people in my social circles.

Some of these negative opinions include:

  • I think that the industries based around cryptocurrencies and other blockchain technologies have always been, and have repeatedly proven themselves to be, nothing more or less than scams run and perpetuated by scam artists.
  • I think that the AI industry is particularly harmful to writers, journalists, actors, artists, and others. This is not because AI produces better pieces of work, but rather due to misanthropic viewpoints of particularly toxic and powerful individuals at the top of the tech industry hierarchy pushing AI as the next big thing due to their general misunderstanding or outright dislike of the general public.
  • I think that capitalism will ultimately doom the tech industry as it reinforces poor system design that deemphasizes maintenance and maintainability in preference of a move fast and break things mentality that still pervades many parts of tech.
  • I think we've squeezed as much capital out of advertising as is possible without completely alienating the modern user, and we risk creating strong anti tech sentiments among the general population if we don't figure out a less intrusive way of monetizing software.

You can agree or disagree with me, but in this thread I'd prefer not to get into arguments over the particular details of why any one of our opinions are wrong or right. Rather, I'd hope you could list what opinions on the tech industry you hold that you feel comfortable expressing here, but are, for whatever reason, reluctant to express in public or at work. I'd also welcome an elaboration of said reason, should you feel comfortable to give it.

I doubt we can completely avoid disagreements, but I'll humbly ask that we all attempt to keep this as civil as possible. Thanks in advance for all thoughtful responses.

(page 2) 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] Nyxicas@kbin.melroy.org 22 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I truly believe that innovating the internet is really running in place. Might be just me but I can't think of anything we can really do, to 'evolve' it. We're doing everything that we've been doing in the past three decades, but it's only just been more accessible and the speeds faster (depending where you are). But we're not actually moving the needle when it comes to progressing the internet as a whole.

And I see it this way as to why. We've experienced two big booms in Web 1.0 and Web 2.0, with Web 1.0 being what some consider the Wild West of the internet. Web 2.0 is basically the great social media bubble that has blossomed for years. We're not doing anything new or different now than we did back in 2007. Every new social media platform that comes out is recycling the exact same things as many before it presented. I truly think we stopped evolving the internet the day we managed to get messengers onto phones when phones were developing and it's only been perfected by the age of the first wave of smartphones.

So I just think with all of this AI stuff, this "Web 3.0" I've been hearing about for a few years now, the Metaverse .etc are all just gimmicks. Gimmicks of shitty ideas coming from the wrong people that should be practicing said ideas, all saying that they're innovating the internet when all that they're doing is just taking advantage of the internet for themselves. All within political theater of course.

[–] lemmyknow@lemmy.today 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

What about Sir Tim Berners-Lee's SoLiD (social linked data)? I mean, I guess it only (or mainly) pertains to data, and doesn't necessarily change the web itself

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 22 points 1 day ago (2 children)

At least half of the people working in tech shouldn't be. They have 0 clue what they're doing and that's dangerous. And far to many people solve everything with a golden hammer.

You don't need a Mac to work in IT. Especially if all your doing is ansible.

Ansible sucks. It's slow, it's limited, it gives a false sense of understanding to do many. I mean it's nice that it's a structured playground for some folks I suppose. But there are better tools that do the exact same thing. Or you could just write a proper script.

[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 3 points 1 day ago

I def disagree about ansible... Because it's impossible to write a "proper script" without making a whole lot of repetitive things, that ansible handles.

It is slow though, and agent-based configuration management, imo, is better for mandating configurations. ie, puppet, for example.

I agree with the rest, though :)

[–] Nyxicas@kbin.melroy.org 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

People and I've been beaten over the head with it too, were marketed to believe that to make it successfully in life is to go with tech. The problem is that most of the people didn't begin with the chops to even understand tech to begin with and yet they try. That's why you see these people working in tech when they shouldn't be. Some are in tech because they got the obvious leg-up, word in about them through a friend which is common. And usually they're managing departments or sectors of tech that they have absolutely no grasp of but they're there for the gravy train of money because working in tech is where some big money is.

[–] Oka@sopuli.xyz 10 points 1 day ago (5 children)

Ive been programming as a hobby before I got a degree in game programming last year. I applied to as many companies as I could, for 6 months, before my funds ran dry. I was forced to go back to min wage.

I've seen people program, and I've seen people "program". People who "program" do it 10 times faster than someone who takes the time to solve the problem and build a modular solution that scales.

Who is the company going to hire, the person who fixes it fastest, or the person who fixes it right?

I'm using my degree to seek a new career. I love programming, but I can't fight the industry.

[–] CaptPretentious@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

Good luck out there, I hope you get your foot in the door soon! Once you're in with a good company and they understand your value, you'll do well.

load more comments (4 replies)
[–] jjjalljs@ttrpg.network 100 points 2 days ago (1 children)

No class consciousness. Too many tech workers think they're rugged individuals that can negotiate their own contracts into wealth.

Working for free on nights and weekends to "hit that deadline" is not good. You're just making the owners rich, and devaluing labor. Even if you own a lot of equity, it's not as much as the owners.

And then there's bullshit like return to office mandates and people are like "oh no none of us want to do this but there's no organized mechanism to resist"

[–] chobeat@lemmy.ml 15 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Join Tech Workers Coalition

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Lettuceeatlettuce@lemmy.ml 36 points 2 days ago (3 children)

Much of what we do and have built is overpriced and useless bullshit that doesn't make anybody better off.

We are inventing solutions and products to manage other solutions and products to manage other solutions and products to...etc etc.

Websites used to be static HTML pages with some simple graphics, images, and some imbedded stuff. Now, you need to know AWS for your IaaS, Kubernetes to manage your scaling and container orchestration for the thousands of Docker containers that you use to compose your app written in some horrific pile of JavaScript related web stacks like NodeJS, Typescript, React, blah blah blah...

Then you need a ton of other 3rd party components that handle authentication, databasing, backups, monitoring, signaling, account creation/management, logging, billing, etc etc.

It's circles within circles within circles, and all that to make a buggy, overpriced, clunky web app.

Similar is true for IT, massive software suites that most people in the company use 10% of their functionality for stupid shit.

I'm all for advancing technology, I love technology, it's my job and my hobby.

But the longer I work in this industry, the more I get this sick feeling that we lost the train long time ago. Buying brand new $1,500 laptops every 3 years so that most of our users can send emails, browse the web, and type up occasional memos.

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] ubergeek@lemmy.today 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

Most IT infra exists solely to justify work that is pointless work.

One if the worst IT sectors is ad tech. The entire industry rationally should not exist.

[–] Grandwolf319@sh.itjust.works 36 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

CEOs and all management suite are mostly useless except for making the business worse for the employees and customers for the sake of investors.

Most employees are perfectly fine with slow and steady growth instead of maximizing it.

[–] Cataphract@lemmy.ml 22 points 2 days ago

It's interesting the preconceived notions over managements usefulness and the actual role a CEO plays in a company. I've had a lot of conversations with people over the years and everyone just expects that it "has to be this way or it won't work". Like every admin position is critical or the company will fail, completely disregarding that most of those positions didn't exist before and the company ran just fine.

There's a lot of misinformation over what their actual job entails. Management is mostly just one big "telephone" game (been on all sides of it, got out just in time before it warped my perception of life). The original role of being support is completely absent in their duties as our society and culture has changed. People also think a co-op would never work because you need a big shot CEO who runs the company and makes all the decisions (they don't, plenty of examples in reality).

It's kinda funny to hear a lot of the tech people on here mention imposter syndrome. Every person in administration has this feeling deep down inside that they aren't important and they have no clue what they're doing. The only difference is everyone in the C-suite pat's eachother on the back and help build each other's ego up so they can just pretend they don't feel it. It's why people in these positions get so defensive and irate if you start dissecting their actual duties and importance. They've been reassured everyday that what they do is integral when it's suppose to be the managers job to make his employees feel that way.

[–] graycube@lemmy.world 106 points 2 days ago

Most of the high visibility "tech bros" aren't technical. They are finance bros who invest in tech.

[–] Nomecks@lemmy.ca 12 points 1 day ago* (last edited 1 day ago)

There are some highly intelligent, very dangerous people out there, and 95% of companies will be incapable of stopping them. Most people, across all industries, are too slow, uneducated, lazy or just uncaring enough that no amount of training or tools will fix it.

[–] psion1369@lemmy.world 12 points 1 day ago

My opinion on tech is that there are cool things being done that do one shiney thing, but everyone disregards the shit it produces behind the scenes. Blookchain is an awesome concept, the whole chain depends on all the other parts of it, but the fact that in order to use it, you have to download the whole thing in several systems. The size of a single will grow so large, only a few companies will be able to analyze it at scale. And AI is a huge joke. Nobody should be celebrating generative AI. A ton of computing power that is dangerous to our eco system, and it's all trained on shady material. Nobody is doing anything significant about the power consumption, just coming up with agencies to help companies use AI properly. It's all a joke. Most of our most influencial technologies are just someone asking how to make big bucks off something comes else created for free.

[–] JakenVeina@lemm.ee 139 points 2 days ago (9 children)

A very large portion (maybe not quite a majority) of software developers are not very good at their jobs. Just good enough to get by.

And that is entirely okay! Applies to most jobs, honestly. But there is really NO appropriate way to express that to a coworker.

I've seen way too much "just keep trying random things without really knowing what you're doing, and hope you eventually stumble into something that works" attitude from coworkers.

[–] Zagorath@aussie.zone 63 points 2 days ago (6 children)

I actually would go further and say that collectively, we are terrible at what we do. Not every individual, but the combination of individuals, teams, management, and business requirements mean that collectively we produce terrible results. If bridges failed at anywhere near the rate that software does, processes would be changed to fix the problem. But bugs, glitches, vulnerabilities etc. are rife in the software industry. And it just gets accepted as normal.

It is possible to do better. We know this, from things like the stuff that sent us to the moon. But we've collectively decided not to do better.

[–] candyman337@sh.itjust.works 9 points 1 day ago

The tech industry is so very capitalistic, so many companies see devs as min max churn machines, tech debt? Nah FEATURES! AI! MODERNITY! That new dev needs to be trained in the basics and best practices? Sorry that's not within scope

[–] folkrav@lemmy.ca 30 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Main difference is, a bridge that fails physically breaks, takes months to repair, and risks killing people. Your average CRUD app... maybe a dev loses a couple or hours figuring out how to fix live data for the affected client, bug gets fixed, and everybody goes on with their day.

Remember that we almost all code to make products that will make a company money. There's just no financial upside to doing better in most cases, so we don't. The financial consequences of most bugs just aren't great enough to make the industry care. It's always about maximizing revenue.

[–] HobbitFoot@thelemmy.club 26 points 2 days ago (8 children)

maybe a dev loses a couple or hours figuring out how to fix live data for the affected client, bug gets fixed, and everybody goes on with their day.

Or thousands of people get stranded at airports as the ticketing system goes down or there is a data breach that exposes millions of people's private data.

Some companies have been able to implement robust systems that can take major attacks, but that is generally because they are more sensitive to revenue loss when these systems go down.

load more comments (8 replies)
load more comments (4 replies)
load more comments (8 replies)
[–] amzd@lemmy.world 48 points 2 days ago (2 children)

All software should be open source

[–] chobeat@lemmy.ml 18 points 2 days ago

All software should be released as a common good that cannot be captured by corporations. Otherwise it's just free labor for Amazon, Google and Facebook

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] GhiLA@sh.itjust.works 19 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago) (1 children)

Right now, Ai is a party trick.

Tomorrow, Ai will inform the FBI that #29933 is planning on murdering his sister, and deploy a team of armed drones to escort him to prison, if he makes it.

Tomorrow, the department stores and supermarkets will be empty and you'll pick up your groceries from an automated warehouse that inserts them into your car.

Tomorrow, the mail bot will barf your mail into a labeled box, wherin you'll find your prescription medication, bottled labeled and packaged by nobody, which you take right after you go out to eat at an empty restaurant, where your food is brought to you by an automated track that says tHaNk Yo in an inhuman tone before cutting off too soon.

No conversations, no traveling, no hassle, no humanity, or sincerity whatsoever.

hooray?

Why the fuck is everyone so stoked about this? Vending-machine land sounds insufferable.

[–] rthomas6@lemmy.ml 7 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Well, this scenario COULD result in the fabled Fully Automated Luxury Gay Space Communism, where machines take care of most of the labor and the benefit of this is shared among everyone. But more likely, most of the benefit of this will be given to a select few.

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 1 points 23 hours ago

Shoot for the FALGSC, fall amongst the CyberpunkDystopia.

War will be automated too. That's going to be "fun" too. Not even Star Trek skipped that part.

[–] Lightor@lemmy.world 30 points 2 days ago

Please stop with the AI pushing. It's a solution looking for a problem, it's a waste in 90% of the cases.

[–] MonkderVierte@lemmy.ml 19 points 2 days ago (1 children)

IT is slowly starting to get regulated like a real engineering field and that's a good developement.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] kibiz0r@midwest.social 32 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think companies that use unethically trained AI (read: basically all gen AI) should be subject to massive litigation, or at least severely damaging boycotts.

Have mentioned it to a lawyer at work, and he was like “I get it, but uh… fat chance, lol”. Would not dare mention it to the AI-hungry folks in leadership.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] Ziggurat@sh.itjust.works 48 points 2 days ago (3 children)

The whole "tech industry" naming is bulllshit, there is more technology let's say in composite used to build an aircraft wing or in a surgerical robots, than in yet another mobile app showing you ads

The whole tech sector also tend to be over evaluated on the stock market. In no world Apple is worth 3 trillion while coca cola or airbus are worth around 200 billions

load more comments (3 replies)
[–] Mr_Fish@lemmy.world 47 points 2 days ago (1 children)

I think most people who actually work in software development will agree with you on those things. The problem is that it's the marketing people and investors who disagree with you, but it's also them who get to make the decisions.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] d00phy@lemmy.world 29 points 2 days ago

Not a software dev, but for me it’s the constant leap from today’s “next best thing” to tomorrow’s. Behind the Bastards did an episode on AI, and his take resonated with me. Particularly his Q&A session with some AI leaders at, I think, CES not long ago. When the new hotness gets popular, an obscene amount of money is paired with the “move fast and break things” attitude in a rush to profit. This often creates massive opportunities for grifters as legislators are mind numbing slow to react to these new technologies. And when regulations are finally passed (or more recently, allowed by the oligarchs), they’re often written to protect the billionaires (read: “job creators”) more than the common customer. Everyone’s bought into the idea that slow and methodical stifles innovation. At least the people funding and regulating these things have.

[–] TheReturnOfPEB@reddthat.com 9 points 2 days ago* (last edited 2 days ago)

rabbits in skinner boxes pressing two buttons for a treat is not a far cry from tech workers sitting in cublices pressing 104 buttons for paycheck nor internet users doing it for imaginary internet points.

load more comments
view more: ‹ prev next ›