Getting Verified As A Human By AI

Complaining about AI killing Stack Overflow while posting a question that perfectly demonstrates why Stack Overflow had to get strict in the first place. The irony is delicious. This question is the equivalent of walking into a library and shouting "WHY AREN'T LIBRARIES COOL ANYMORE?" while the librarian points at the "Quiet Please" sign. The -17 score is just the chef's kiss on this masterpiece of self-contradiction.

Remember when AI engineers actually had to understand math? The top half shows the glory days of hand-crafted algorithms and weeks of debugging custom gradient descent. The bottom half is just us typing "make AI do the thing" into ChatGPT and calling ourselves engineers. We've gone from spending months fine-tuning decision trees to spending minutes fine-tuning our prompts. The muscles have atrophied, but hey, at least we can ship "AI innovation" before lunch now.

Ah, the classic "train AI models for $1,200/week" recruitment ad featuring a clown watering a sad little tree in a barren field. Nothing says "legitimate career opportunity" like 15,000 developers already doing the digital equivalent of selling knives door-to-door. The rope around the tree is a nice touch – can't have that AI training data escaping into the wild. Remember folks, if you're not paying for the product, you are the product... and in this case, you're even paying them with your labor.

Putting on glasses to transform from "LLM Engineer" to "Knows about openai, anthropic and google-genai package" is peak tech industry smoke and mirrors. It's like calling yourself a "Cloud Architect" because you once deployed a WordPress site to AWS. The glasses don't add intelligence—they just help you see through the BS of your own job title. Next time someone introduces themselves as an "LLM Engineer," ask them if they can actually explain a transformer architecture or if they just know how to copy-paste API keys.

The modern developer's apocalypse: your code is on fire, production is crashing, and ChatGPT just responded with "I'm sorry, but I don't have enough context to debug your specific issue." Meanwhile you're just sitting there, surrounded by flames, eerily calm like SpongeBob, because this is the third time this week and you've transcended panic into a state of zen-like acceptance.

Ah yes, nothing says "efficient solution" like using a machete labeled "Deep learning" to slice through a tiny piece of bread labeled "Simple problem." The classic case of computational overkill. Why use a simple if-statement when you could train a 500-layer neural network that requires a small power plant to run? Next week: using quantum computing to calculate a 15% tip.