Being a meat proxy for AI should be grounds for getting people fired

The piece argues that developers who merely relay instructions to an AI agent and pass its output along without guiding, checking, or disclosing the process should face workplace consequences, including dismissal in serious cases. It distinguishes this conduct from responsible AI-assisted development, where a person directs the tool, validates and improves its work, and remains accountable for what they submit. A human who adds no judgment or verification, the writer says, provides no meaningful value and can make others do the neglected work.

The concern is that unreviewed AI use is becoming a way to create the appearance of high productivity: developers can submit many elaborate pull requests whose code is unreliable or harmful. This wastes colleagues’ time, shifts review and repair duties onto them, and consumes company resources while putting products at risk. The writer also describes receiving private messages that seem to be AI responses pasted in without disclosure, and rejects responding with more unchecked AI output as likely to worsen the damage. The central principle is that using AI does not remove a developer’s responsibility for their work; people who dislike the job should leave rather than use automation to avoid doing it at others’ expense.