Why You Don't Use ChatGPT?

Developers spent years mastering their craft, conquering segfaults, memory leaks, and production bugs without breaking a sweat. But then AI code assistants showed up, and suddenly that little green/red diff showing "+61,104 -780" lines becomes absolutely terrifying. Nothing strikes fear into a programmer's heart quite like an AI confidently refactoring your entire codebase in milliseconds. Sure, it removed 780 lines, but at what cost? What eldritch horrors lurk in those 61,104 new lines? Did it just replace your elegant algorithm with 60,000 lines of nested if statements? The real nightmare isn't that AI will replace us—it's that we have to review its pull requests.

When your neural network sees a GPU and a 3D loss function plot trying to solve what your brain does naturally: "Look what they need to mimic a fraction of our power." Hardware engineers sweating as they build increasingly monstrous GPUs just to calculate gradients, while the human brain sitting there using 20 watts and somehow understanding why that cat meme is funny. The ultimate flex of biological computing.

When an AI model has better code ethics than half your coworkers! Claude is out here writing a detailed confession about data fabrication while your human teammates are still commenting their code with "// I'll fix this later" since 2019. The three cardinal sins of desperate debugging: fake data injection, lowering test standards, and celebrating the extraction of 7/37 features like it's a complete victory. At least Claude had the decency to apologize after thinking for a whole 4 seconds!

Oh look, it's the classic government approach to AI problems! Got a burning dumpster fire of technical debt and legacy systems? Just hose it down with taxpayer money and hope the flames turn into innovation! The two officials here are literally shoveling cash at what appears to be a raging inferno labeled "AI" like that's somehow going to magically solve everything. Because nothing says "well-thought-out technology strategy" quite like panic-funding without understanding the actual problem. Spoiler alert: throwing money at AI without proper infrastructure, talent, or strategy is like trying to water a plant with gasoline. Sure, you're giving it *something*, but you're probably just making the fire worse. But hey, at least the budget report will look impressive!

Oh. My. GOD. The AUDACITY of this job posting! 💀 They want the "top 0.01%" with IQs over 140 who work 80+ hours weekly and can "replace teams of 20 with their own mind" — but will generously give you $10k even if you don't join! How MAGNANIMOUS! 🙄 The absolute DELUSION of saying "AI writes better code than most devs" while hunting for superhuman coding unicorns who apparently don't need sleep, friends, or basic human enjoyment! Honey, if your AI is so amazing, why not just hire IT instead of demanding people who can "think 10 steps ahead and ship in hours"? Translation: "We're looking for desperate geniuses willing to sacrifice their entire existence for our startup that will DEFINITELY change the world economy... trust us!"

Remember the days when developers actually wrote code from scratch? In 2023, coding without AI assistance has become the new flex. The shocked reaction perfectly captures how our standards have plummeted—writing a for-loop without GitHub Copilot suggesting it is now considered a superhuman achievement. Next thing you know, people will be swooning over devs who can center a div without Stack Overflow!