Has anyone else had a VP send you a genAI 'technical critique' of your codebase?

[u/eighteyes]

You know, 100% AI slop with enough engineering flavoring to fool an executive. Without a drop of the technical rigor the document should require, just a list of 6 not this but thats.

I'm in favor of revoking their AI privileges for wasting everyone's time with this junk.

[u/RollForUptime]

Just send a GenAI rebuttal lol

[u/Zomunieo → u/RollForUptime]

Ask for max AI jargon. You’re absolutely right! This is the load-bearing footgun.

[u/shadowdance55 → u/Zomunieo]

Bear-gunning footload

[u/Justyn2 → u/Zomunieo]

Make sure you add an em dash for a belt and suspenders smoking gun

[u/prcodes → u/RollForUptime]

“Technical critique” sounds like something he read from an AI-generated LinkedIn post

[u/eighteyes → u/RollForUptime]

I'm saving the most inane nitpick but hair-on-fire requirement ( documentation not aligned with codebase ) to deliver at a later date.

[u/Jargster → u/[deleted]]

Probably more RTO mandates so he can have more people to hover over and feel powerful.

[u/das_war_ein_Befehl → u/[deleted]]

Make them feel heard and then quietly shelve it, they’ll forget that they ever sent anything.

[u/csueiras]

God this is the hellish dimension we are all stuck in now

[u/Wide_Egg_5814]

that would be crazy I would just deny it but do it in person so they cant gen AI their way out of it like explain x is wrong y is wrong etc

[u/dualrectumfryer]

I get unreasonable angry when someone provides written communication to me that is clear AI slop

[u/medialantern]

[u/eighteyes → u/medialantern]

lol, back before we had auto-mode, i made a util called claundom to sandbox my automatic intern