I'm curious to hear from Senior Software Architects, Senior Consultants and Senior Engineers; how are you guys handling AI shallow expertise (slop) these days? I'm experiencing increased business processes decisions border-lining with software or solution designs coming down already defined and settled without a proper debate/brainstorming or requirements gathering/discussion with a technical resource and effectively (or un effectively) finding myself in the corner of saying: “This would not work, there is a lot more to it than this”, but not having the time or energy to fight it back because the dead lines are becoming more (and not less) unrealistic? How do you debate an idea (design) already settled (on their minds) by more than three people using AI and reaching the same shallow conclusion that at the same time are at a higher pay grade than you are even if arguably you are being paid to advise them on the right direction or approach?

Doctors are the worst patients.

I got told recently by a friend essentially that as long as you're paid, does it matter? They'll pay you to fix it too.... If they won't listen at all, I'd voice/get your opinion noted for the record, then fix it after they get their way and it doesn't quite work out. It's a really hard battle to have. Unless you can find an equivalent version based on what they do, so they can see that it's just the tip of the iceberg and would say the same to you, there isn't a lot of winning in these conversations. The other option is you get the chat sent to you, you ask more detailed, specific q's to get the "tech detail needed to do it" and break it in front of the eyes 😉