> It is reported that Amazon had offered to increase its shipping volumes with UPS to meet growing delivery demands.
> However, UPS declined, opting instead to adjust its operations for higher profitability. “Due to their operational needs, UPS requested a reduction in volume and we certainly respect their decision,” said Amazon spokesperson Kelly Nantel.
Given the Teamsters are endorsing these views, I wouldn’t be so quick to jump to conclusions. Amazon is building an internal UPS competitor. UPS may simply not want to over-extend itself.
If I were to wildly speculate, Amazon is happy to give shipping partners as much low margin volume as they're willing to take. UPS has higher labor costs because they have union workers, while Amazon does not. To your point, the Teamsters are fine with this because their members have a contract and labor protections from arbitrary cuts. ~70% of UPS' 443k employees are represented by the Teamsters' Union, per UPS' website.
An average UPS driver pulls ~$100k, with some getting close to $170k. Amazon delivery network humans are not approaching this comp and benefits.
The moment the software is in production, making a lot of money and is stable, I then add lots of tests (both unit and integration) to prevent a $1,000 issue turning into a $100,000 problem later down the line.
Instead of testing everything to being perfect, 100% test coverage and never releasing and the company questioning why the deadlines were missed for the project because of testing dogma.
> I've personally found that when the architecture of the system is not mature yet, unit tests can get in the way. Terribly so. Integration tests or system tests to assert behavior seem the starting point in this and other scenario's, including when there are no tests at all yet.
Only if the startup idea you are raising for is worth it, which now matters more than ever as execution is going to zero.
If that doesn't bother you and you need the cash now, then in summary:
For: Access to bookface network (secret network for YC founders and mentors).
Against: Depends on the terms, maybe not good if you mess up the cap table allocation.
If you don't mind the risk for a small amount of equity then you might as well do it before AGI arrives.
Well either way, the infosec folks are going to have the time of their lives printing write-ups and lots of money on both sides.
I can see the sandbox escapes, remote code exection paths, exfiltration methods and all the vibe coded sandcastles waiting to be knocked down because we have folks openly admiting that do not know a single line of code they are prompting to the AI.
I don't think we know the scale of the amout of security issues we will see because of the level of hubris there is with AI taking care of all of the coding.
The experienced generalists with techniques of verification testing are the winners [0] in this.
But one thing you cannot do, is openly admit or to be found out to say something like: "I don't know a single line of Rust/Go/Typescript/$LANG code but I used an AI to do all of it" and the system breaks down and you can't fix it.
It would be quite difficult to take a SWE seriously that prides themselves in having zero understanding and experience of building production systems and runs the risk of losing the company time and money.
Going to see a lot of career switches in SWE, because the majority of them were bootcamping in frontend frameworks which that quickly evaporated thanks to LLMs.
All the industry is just asking for is expert-level full stack software engineering experience (not anything niche, specific or narrow) which you just need an elite focus on systems design and architecture.
If you can't demonstrate to a company that you can make them a lot of money with your skills, they will just see you as another cost and a massive risk.
Generalists are the winners in this and CAD will just as automateable as SWE.
Honestly I looked at Go for malware and I mean AV detection for golang used to be ehh but recently It got strong.
Then it became a cat and mouse game with obfuscators and deobfucsators.
John Hammond has a *BRILLIANT* Video on this topic. 100% recommneded.
Honestly Speaking from John Hammond I feel like Nim as a language or V-lang is something which will probably get vibe coded malware from. Nim has been used for hacking so much that iirc windows actually blocked the nim compiler as malware itself!
Nim's biggest issue is that hackers don't know it but if LLM's fix it. Nim becomes a really lucrative language for hackers & John Hammond described that Nim's libraries for hacking are still very decent.
reply