3 ms·
Let's say coding is actually 50% of your job (for almost no engineers is it). If AI makes you 30% more efficient at coding (it might if you went from having li
by onlyrealcuzzo 2y ago
Let's say coding is actually 50% of your job (for almost no engineers is it).
If AI makes you 30% more efficient at coding (it might if you went from having literally 0 code completion or any form of AI to state of the art, not many people are doing that):
* 1 engineer = 50% feature dev (1x), 50% other
* 1 engineer with AI = 50% feature dev (1.15x), 50% other
So engineers are theoretically getting 15% more done. If your company is growing faster than 15%, you're probably still going to need to hire eng.
The real way SalesForce is going to increase productivity is by forcing more unpaid overtime, not by AI.
- zeroonetwothree 2y agoFWIW various studies find that software engineers spend about 25% of their time coding on average.
- dasil003 2y agoThis kind of math is nonsense, even as a back-of-the-napkin exercise. Engineers productivity is not linear, both over time and team size. In fact there may be productivity improvements just be freezing hiring as adding too many people becomes net negative if the architecture and domain complexity does not support. Also, writing code is not the bottleneck on value, it's making the correct changes that adds value. While AI can accelerate simple and repetitive code production, this could easily add more technical debt and be net-negative producing over time if engineers aren't thinking about the big picture. On the other hand AI could add a lot of value not directly related to coding as it can process and "understand" more breadth of information (including code) that can magnify engineers productivity if used thoughtfully, but that may have no direct relationship to coding per se.