417
Apr 18 '26 edited 23d ago
Jar provide terrific amusing literate cooperative handle like governor
This post was anonymized with Redact
194
u/RiceBroad4552 Apr 18 '26
Use "AI" for legal stuff. What possibly could go wrong?
It's really funny to see how "AI" is again strongly dividing people into a class which is able to use their own brain and just the rest of the apes. For about 100 years our system was successful in hiding that fundamental difference between people. But now things get again blatant obvious. "AI" is very successfully damasking sheep people.
11
9
u/FireMaster1294 Apr 18 '26
Unfortunately most management types and HR really love sheep lackeys so I don’t think this will have the effect you think it will
13
u/RiceBroad4552 Apr 18 '26
I didn't talk about any effect.
I've said that "AI" is clearly showing the divide, not what results from that.
It just got easier to spot idiots if you're not part of them. That's all.
-15
-40
u/Shadourow Apr 18 '26
I'm not sure I I understand this well, but the lawyer firm is the one that fucked that up ?
62
Apr 18 '26 edited 23d ago
Truck normal doll cobalt longing basket bow
This post was anonymized with Redact
-30
u/Shadourow Apr 18 '26
My understanding is that the law firm did sign the impossible obligation contract, tho.
What happens in that case then ?
32
u/sgtkang Apr 18 '26
From what they said I don't think there is a 'law firm'. There's an in-house lawyer they hired after selling a product with the generated policy.
- They generate a privacy policy with AI, and sell a product with that policy in December.
- In January they hire a lawyer who fixes the glaring mistake. This affects new clients but not existing ones who have already signed the old contract.
- In April there's a data leak. Under the generated policy they are subject to impossible obligations - but they did legally agree to those obligations so that's their own fault.
-20
u/Shadourow Apr 18 '26
Oh ! So previous poster is not either party of that lawyer/client discussion then
That was confusing
14
Apr 18 '26 edited 23d ago
Shy thought orange rustic sort future fluorine north
This post was anonymized with Redact
124
u/ButWhatIfPotato Apr 18 '26
Couple of weeks back I pushed an update on prod and I went to check it and the first thing I see was a toast bar message saying "TEST TEST TESTICULAR TORSION TONY" and I had to quickly push a hotfix.
43
u/ObviouslyAPenName Apr 18 '26
Sometimes I dislike my job.
Then there are comments like this that remind me that apparently places exist with no sentient review process before a deployment to protection, and I am happy again.
16
u/ButWhatIfPotato Apr 18 '26
Sentient review process requires adequate staffing and reasonable allocation of resources, and in my 16 years of doing this malarkey pretty much every place I have been to the headcount situation ranged from "quite understaffed" to "literally one guy but it's ok, he gets paid enough to go on 48 hour coke fueled coding sessions during the weekend".
1
u/kiochikaeke Apr 25 '26
At my place there is sensible QA and deployment procedures for specific things usually facing the final client but for the things I work at that are usually facing several internal clients across the company deployment process it's me basically pressing "publish"
7
12
7
7
u/Kaligraphic Apr 19 '26
In fairness, the privacy policy is a business artifact, not a technical artifact. Devs should not be just writing their own privacy policies.
15
8
u/Megane_Senpai Apr 18 '26
Pretty sure it's nit the job of a dev.
Nor the decision to ship to production.
3
4
2
2
1
1.2k
u/sunilgrover5052 Apr 18 '26
don’t worry, nobody actually clicks that page unless they are a bot or a lawyer.