Readit NewsIf s/he is running a company and not a charity, this is responsible, understandable, and predictable.
Russia has vast natural resources and enough buyers for those resources even if the EU manages to completely stop (at significant cost). Their industry turned to wartime mode, resulting in the fact that they now have more armored vehicles than in February 2022.
Will they actually physically reach Italy? Probably not. Will they try to buy it out and bring a (even more) fascist autocratic regime there? Probably yes.
I work on a large product with two decades of accumulated legacy, maybe that's the problem. I can see though how generating and editing a simple greenfield web frontend project could work much better, as long as actual complexity is low.
I'm in a similar situation, and for the first time ever I'm actually considering if a rewrite to microservices would make sense, with a microservice being something small enough an AI could actually deal with - and maybe even build largely on its own.
Calling Claude (or GPT-5 or Gemini or my bash terminal for that matter) a "he" seems absurd to the point of hilarity.
In my mind, they've always firmly been "it"s.
I find it plausible at least.
And the thing is, lobbying by domestic and foreign interests has been so normalized, that most people are already numb to it. Like Putin was even visiting his Austrian politicians buddies who then got jobs at Russian oil and gas companies after their terms and nobody in EU kicked much fuss about it when it was all done public and in the open and in 2022 we got to experience the consequences.
So as long as nobody from politics is going to jail for treason or insurrection, or at least lose their seat and generous pension over such blatant cases of corruption and treason, this will only continue or even grow larger, as those in power have proven to be unaccountable to anyone.
I don't know how we(the public) can fix this peacefully an democratically, as any party I can vote for gets captured by lobbyist interests who seek to undermine our interests.
Those groups have only 235 seats in the EU parliament out of 720.
I've been the manager on the other side of a lot of situations that could be described like this. In many cases, it was hard to explain to the person that there were dozens and dozens of inputs that go into my decision making, including a lot of invisible factors and relationships that I was juggling.
It's hard to communicate to someone who sees a very thin slice of the company and wants to disagree and do something different to appeal to their perspective. A lot of the time I knew very clearly that we weren't picking the "best" alternative, but after hearing everyone out and weighing the tradeoffs a decision was made.
> Remember, he ultimately doesn't care if the product works. He cares if he can claim success. You're not helping him claim success, so you're a problem.
HN comments are wildly cynical. People who consume a lot of this cynicism think they're getting a leg up on the workplace by seeing the world for how it really is, but in my experience becoming the uber-cynic who believes all bosses are intentionally destroying the product with bad decisions to claim success (how does that even work?) is the kind of thinking that leads people into self-sabotaging hatred of all bosses. You need to watch out for yourself, but adopting this level of cynicism doesn't lead to good outcomes. Treat it case by case and be open to the idea that you might not have all the information.
You're saying it's hard to communicate that, but you've just done it really well. If you were to tell me a bit about those trade offs so I can also consider them the next time, I'd be a perfectly happy camper even if my idea isn't being picked up.