@JustinLau04: Half the engineers you just hired are sh*t. AI has made it impossible to tell. So we fixed this:
Summary
A tweet from Justin Lau claims AI has made it difficult to evaluate engineers' real abilities and points to a solution to fix this hiring problem.
View Cached Full Text
Cached at: 08/07/26, 07:00 PM
Half the engineers you just hired are sh*t. AI has made it impossible to tell.
So we fixed this: https://t.co/fQBJtIcEMk
Similar Articles
"Ford’s AI wasn’t smart enough to replace veteran engineers — so it hired 350 specialists to shore up its quality control issues" are we overestimating current AI tech? Are LLMs actually any smart?
Ford admits it over-relied on AI for quality control, which failed to replace veteran engineers' expertise, and has hired 350 technical specialists to improve vehicle quality.
AI didn’t remove engineering work. It moved the hard part somewhere else.
AI has made writing code cheaper but shifted the hard work to context-setting, review, and cleanup, requiring more skilled oversight. The article argues that teams often treat AI-generated code as finished work when it is actually a fast first draft.
Designing AI-resistant technical evaluations
Anthropic engineer Tristan Hume discusses the challenges of designing AI-resistant technical take-home tests for hiring performance engineers, detailing how recent Claude models have begun to outperform human candidates.
Are we creating AI Engineers or just AI tool users?
The article observes a trend where junior AI engineers focus on high-level tools like prompt engineering and low-code platforms rather than deep understanding of fundamentals, raising concerns about problem-solving skills in interviews.
“AI engineers” today are just prompt engineers with better branding?
A viral hot take argues that today's "AI engineers" are mostly prompt engineers rebranded, questioning whether API-chaining and guardrails count as true engineering versus just using AI effectively.