3 ms·

The central issue here is whether the money pouring into AI companies is producing anything other than more AI companies. I think the article's premise is basi

The central issue here is whether the money pouring into AI companies is producing anything other than more AI companies. I think the article's premise is basically correct - if we had a 10x explosion of productivity where is the evidence? I would think some is potentially hidden in corporate / internal apps but despite everyone at my current employer using these tools we don't seem to be going any faster. I will admit that my initial thoughts on Copilot were that "yes this is faster" but that was back when I was only using it for rote / boilerplate work. I've not had a lot of success trying to get it to do higher level work and that's also the experience of my co-workers. I can certainly see why a particular subset of programmers find the tools particularly compelling, if their job was producing boilerplate then AI is perfect.

atleastoptimal 1y ago
Yeah AI code is ideal for boilerplate, converting between languages, basically anything where the success criteria are definite. I don’t think there is a 10x productivity upgrade across the board, but in limited domains, yes, AI can produce human level work 10x faster. The fundamental difference of opinion people have here though is some people see current AI capabilities as a floor, while others see it as a ceiling. I’d agree with arguments that AI companies are overvalued if current models are as capable as AI will ever be for the rest of time, but clearly that is not the case, and very likely, as they have been every few months over the past few years, they will keep getting better.
- card_zero 1y ago
  Which way is the rate of change going?