There is an alternative way make the necessary point here.. Let it go through with comments to the effect that you can not attest to the quality or efficacy of the code and let the organization suffer the consequences of this foray into LLM usage. If they can't use these tools responsibly and are unwilling to listen to the people who can, then they deserve to hit the inevitable quality wall Where endless passes through the AI still can't deliver working software and their token budget goes through the ceiling attempting to make it work.

▲

ytoawwhra92 a day ago | parent [-]

I think you're falling victim to the just-world fallacy.

▲

zaphar a day ago | parent [-]

I am absolutely certain the world isn't just. I'm also absolutely certain the world can't get just unless you let people suffer consequences for their decisions. It's the only way people can world.

	▲	ytoawwhra92 13 hours ago \| parent [-]
		IME that simply doesn't work in professional environments. People will either misrepresent the failure as a success or find someone else to pin the blame on. Others won't bother taking the time to understand what actually happened because they're too busy and often simply don't care. And if it's nominally your responsibility to keep something up, running, and stable then you're a very likely scapegoat if it fails. Which is probably why people are throwing stuff that doesn't work at you in the first place. Trying to solve the problem through politics is highly unlikely to work because if you were any good at politics you wouldn't have been in that situation in the first place.