Some quotes that resonated with me:

In any previous era, the quality of a piece of work was a more or less reliable signal of the competence of the person who produced it. A novice essay read like a novice essay; novice code crashed in novice ways. AI has severed that relationship.

The skills of producing work and judging it were deliberately distinct, but accomplishing the work itself used to teach the judgment. The first skill now belongs, in large part, to the machines. The second still belongs to us, though fewer are bothering to acquire or utilize it.

The slowness was not a tax on the real work; the slowness was the real work. It was how the work got good, and how the people producing the work got good

The current generation of agentic systems is built around the premise that the human is the bottleneck — that the loop runs faster and cleaner without the awkward delay of someone reading what is about to happen and deciding whether it should. This is, in a great many cases, exactly backwards

I get what you’re saying. To me, this reads like someone who takes pride in forming assumptions (and biases) about a team before speaking to any of its members. A fun game for them, perhaps, but less fun for the folks they are trying to pigeonhole.

I guess there’s a fine line between collecting information to have a productive, data-driven conversation, and doing it to avoid having a conversation entirely.

Also seems like they’re more interested in connecting with the boss than the developers themselves, which is probably something you need to do as a contractor, but yeah, it does alienate other developers.