"Early in the history of Multivac, it had become apparent that there was one big bottleneck: the questioning procedure. Multivac could answer the problems of humanity, all the problems, if -- if it were asked meaningful questions. But as knowledge accumulated at an ever-faster rate, it became ever more difficult to locate those meaningful questions."
[0] https://web.archive.org/web/20150118004835/http://www.sffaud...
This is already the case with most DevOps jobs with Claude Code. There are only that many finite issues that need fixing in production, even for very large systems.
So you don't need all that many people to run ops these days.
And it's not just github, everything seems to be down on a daily basis right now.
It used to be that you compiled an executable, copied it onto the target computer and it worked. Then came servers, where you had to open some ports, set up some init scripts, maybe a db connection string.
This has evolved into a fractal of awfulness of a myriad of options and problems, each of which more elaborate and specifically limited than what came before, so you can't really use any one of them, but a combination, which is bound to interact weirdly, giving you some unique problems.
LLMs are great at solving these kinds of problems, but these problems should not exist in the first place, and they just waste everyone's time.
When it comes to actual meaningful product questions (and not just 'how/where does this code run'), LLMs are basically next to hopeless.
Since LLMs are very good with dealing with the BS, I hope they'll be useful in making people recognize and do away with BS altogether, and we can go back to the simple olden days.
>It used to be that you compiled an executable, copied it onto the target computer and it worked.
Java had been marketed last century as a 'write once, run anywhere' language. Tells you a lot about how portable executables in other languages were.
In the second book of the book series, "The Restaurant at the End of the Universe", the question gets revealed: "What do you get if you multiply six by nine?"