Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

You'd have to define a "bad idea" much more precisely and in the context of that particular business.

Developers often do push back and warn against ideas that have too many compromises, but cannot outright say no just because of that. There are too many other people involved.

You seem to think that any one person/group has/wants/should have full control when deemed necessary. That doesn't make sense unless either the success criteria are lacking (you call the shots alone and probably miss a ton of opportunities), or the requirements are so constrained that all the work is just optimizing the implementation (someone else already called the shots without you).

If your work is either of those situations it means the business plan sucks. AI is the least of your worries.

 help



* I want to be clear, I'm using "you" in the general sense - apologies if it reads as accusatory.

If you lack the ability to say no to objectively bad ideas, you have very little value as a developer. Anyone can code a feature just because someone said to code it (Claude builds trivial objects for me every day when I know what I want but can't remember the specific syntax or pattern to do it). It takes actual skill and expertise to both recognize bad ideas, and convince people they're bad ideas.

> You seem to think that any one person/group has/wants/should have full control when deemed necessary.

No, I think subject matter experts should function as experts and should have decision-making power within their scope of expertise - if they're unable to convince others, then they are ineffective and should be replaced by SMEs who are effective.

I don't understand why you think a committee approach and implementation of bad ideas, regardless of what the experts in the room think, is an optimal business pattern.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: