@utf_7 @charette I agree, tho! I said this in the past, but from my point of view, there's no tradeoff between quality and speed. If you decide to make your app bad to make it "fast", it will only be fast initially, but the tech debt will make it slow sooner or later.

If you choose to make your app good, then you'll have to be slow initially, but you'll be faster in the long run.

The problem is this industry forgot about "long term", everything has to be done now ("move fast, break stuff" ).

@cismonx somehow looking for moral and legal loopholes while saying they can choose all 3 is so on brand for AI grifters

@charette oh yes, 100%

@LukefromDC I don’t have to imagine it, I can just watch one of the many airplane accident movies hollywood produced over the years

@Axolotl1 sadly there are a lot of companies getting comfortable with exploitation which is the “loophole” of this graph: You dismiss worker rights and suddenly you can get cheap work!

@kaito02 don’t get me wrong, from my POV it’s slow in the long run (because it introduces never ending tech debt), but sloperators chose “fast twice” because they only think about speed and amount of code as metrics, they don’t even consider quality or cost.

@QuestionGirl good and AI are like water and oil, so I’m inferring you mean that you would choose good and fast over “fast twice” like sloperators do. It’s a good yet expensive choice, but if you have the resources, is a good option.

I personally prefer good and cheap, which means slow, but only initially. Slowly made good code is faster in the long run, but quickly made bad code will be slower in the long run.

The only true way to avoid debt is to not take loans to begin with

In engineering we say "Good, Cheap, Fast. Pick 2"'. AI is when you pick Fast twice.