A lot of the comments in this thread are down voted. None of them have anything to do with the content of the video people came here to see discussion of.
The concept of the responsible party bearing the costs is a good one, but if we're honest about who that is, it's often going to be company leadership.
The person who made the breaking change is often diligently following instructions to get it done as soon as possible.
The classic pattern is they become a larger company, and either those processes stop working well, or a custom solution becomes worthwhile due to scale.
The row count limit in Excel has been hit many times over the years.
You're both criticizing management for not knowing who's doing important work, and also for spending time talking to engineers to understand what's going on.
Most solutions to understand what's going on, in detail, are naturally going to be quite time consuming.
It's not exactly a misconception, when companies are pitching AI as a full and complete replacement for human employees. People are just reading the billboards on the side of the road.
I always found advertisements for AI to be so strange, why would you advertise your AI to the public as a danger for humanity that will also put everyone out of work? Such advertising would only appeal to sociopaths, but of course that's because it's intended to appeal to CEOs.
It is just some chuunibyou bullshit to say "Look at how powerful my LLM is!". It is a dumbass publicity stunt, you're just reading into your preconceptions hard.
reply