A Chevy dealership in Watsonville, California placed an Ai chat bot on their website. A few people began to play with its responses, including making a sales offer of a dollar on a new vehicle source: …slashdot.org/…/car-buyer-hilariously-tricks-chev…
I think this vastly depends on if there’s malicious intent involved with it, and I mean this on both sides. in the case of what was posted they manipulated the program outside of its normal operating parameters to list a quote for the vehicle. Even if they had stated this AI platform was able to do quotes which for my understanding the explicitly stated it’s not allowed to do, the seller could argue that there is a unilateral mistake involved that the other side of the party knew about and which was not given to the seller or there is very clear fraudulent activity on the buyers side both of which would give the seller the ability to void the contract.
In the case of no buy side manipulation it gets more difficult, but it could be argued that if the price was clearly wrong, the buyer should have known that fact and was being malicious in intent so the seller can withdraw
Of course this is all with the understanding that the program somehow meets the capacity to enter a legally binding agreement of course
also fun fact, Walmart had this happen with their analytical program five or so years ago, and they listed the Roku streaming stick for ~50 less so instead of it being $60 it was listed as 12, all the stores got flooded with online orders for Roku devices because that’s a damn good deal however they got a disclaimer not soon after that any that came in at that price point were to be Auto canceled, which is allowed by the sites TOS
In my opinion, we shouldn’t waste time in the courts arguing over whether a claim or offer made by an algorithm is considered reasonable or not. If you want to blindly rely on the technology, you have to be responsible for its output. Keep it simple and let the corporations (and the people making agreements with a chatbot) shoulder the risk and responsibility.
I had a friend doing mobile gamedev, making near unheard-of money for their then city of residence, had everything going well for them… except the job was soul-crushing and draining, eventually giving them severe depression.
When I was getting my first dev job, they said I’d be really sorry about doing outsource, and I just thought that out of us two, I’d be the really happy one, even making much less than them.
Learning to deal with “unmaintanable” codebases is a pretty good skill. It taught me good documentation and refactoring manners. It’s only a problem for you if management does not accept that their velocity has gone down as a result of tech debt pilling up.
Code should scream it’s intent (business-wise) so as to be self-documenting as much as possible As much as possible is not 100%, so add comments when needed. Comments should be assumed to be relevant when written, at best. Git comment should be linked to your work ticket so that we can figure out why the hell you would do that, when looking at the code file itself. I swear some people seem to think we only read them in PRs (we don’t). Overall concepts used everyday, if they need to be reexplained, should probably be written down (at least today’s version). Tests are documentation. Often the only up to date one?
This right here. Get good at navigating code of questionable quality that you didn’t write. If you can’t do it, start questioning your tools, and mastery of those tools. For the big boy jobs, you should be working with existing code much more than writing new code. Learn to get excited by tweaking existing systems with a few well placed, well researched changes, instead of being The Asshole that adds a new abstraction wart.
Just rewrite it with 80% functionality and force migrations on the users. Once the remaining 20% “edge cases” that require serious effort hop to the next job - where you where hired to “maintain” such a system and “just add a small feature here and there”. Ooops.
programmer_humor
Active
This magazine is from a federated server and may be incomplete. Browse more on the original instance.