5 ms·
Usage does not correlate with valued output or ROI. This article smells like a bad attempt to say hey guys our customers see ROI without any actual evidence tha
by cmiles8 2mo ago
Usage does not correlate with valued output or ROI. This article smells like a bad attempt to say hey guys our customers see ROI without any actual evidence that they do.
Also, somewhat amusingly, the “founder” consistently being at the top of the use curve might just have something to do with everyone else also using it, but that more implies people are using it because the chief at the top wants them to use it… not because it’s actually useful. A pattern that’s typical of bad AI deployments.
- danggggg 2mo ago[dead]
- drodgers 2mo agoSkill issue. If you make an effort to use the new tools effectively, the gains are wild. Don't fall into a grumpy luddite trap, the train is leaving the station and you'll struggle to catch up if you don't learn and grow. Not using AI for software development in 2027 will be like only knowing how to program via punchcard in 2010. It's new. It's different. It's hard. It's your job. Learn how to use it effectively, embrace the new abundance mindset.
- inigyou 2mo agoThis but the train is competence (the opposite of AI) and it has already left.
- danggggg 2mo ago[dead]
- drodgers 2mo ago> spent millions on AI contracts The key question is how much value has been delivered on the other end for a given cost. Well used, tokens would be cheap at 10x the price right now.
- bluecalm 2mo ago>> Don't fall into a grumpy luddite trap, the train is leaving the station and you'll struggle to catch up if you don't learn and grow. If that's true things are truly hopeless for pre-school/school children who are not in position to jump on the train just yet.
- inigyou 2mo agoChildren will jump on any train, that's why I'm in computers, and why there's an AI cheating crisis right now so severe that nobody is learning anything in schools.
- duskdozer 2mo agoIs this mean-spirited comment really what you want to share as the face of your company?
- danggggg 2mo ago[dead]
- jappgar 2mo agoHis comment sucks but it is indeed a skill issue. Not the skill of "agentic coding" or whatever but the skill of having and communicating good ideas. A lot of engineers/people are bad at that, and are struggling to produce anything of value with AI coding.
- chasd00 2mo agoI don’t know this person but no one else is holding back on mean spirited replies, I see no reason they shouldn’t reply in same.
- chasd00 2mo ago> It's new. It's different. It's hard. It's your job. Learn how to use it effectively, embrace the new abundance mindset. This. Except it’s not that hard to get proficient. Either learn it or get left behind same as it ever was in software tech.
- qsera 2mo agoThe AI whisperer! The hottest job title of 2026!
- rfgplk 2mo ago> If you make an effort to use the new tools effectively, the gains are wild. Don't fall into a grumpy luddite trap, the train is leaving the station and you'll struggle to catch up if you don't learn and grow. Correct, in fact you can tell most AI detractors aren't thinking about this from a _computer science_ point of view. You'll have many people claiming "why prompt an LLM when you can write it and commit it yourself in 45 minutes?" True, you could. But that's a purely _serial_ workload. LLMs are effectively data-independent and they can.. work in _parallel_. Meaning instead of working on a single task, you can juggle multiple simultaneously. So even if you're as fast or faster on a one-on-one basis, you _cannot physically_ be faster than 10 separate sessions running in parallel, working on wholly separate tasks. And that's actually where most 10x gains come from. See Amdahl's/Gustafson's laws.
- inigyou 2mo agoConsidering many of them are starting from an existing product and making it worse, they're -10x
- danggggg 2mo ago[dead]
- blfr 2mo ago> Usage does not correlate with valued output or ROI This sounds possible but how can we know? It could just as well correlate. Effort of all kinds correlates with success even when it's not obvious or not... linear.
- danggggg 2mo ago[dead]
- blfr 2mo agoIt's hard to measure ROI so we generally wouldn't. Even McKinseys and BCGs have a hard time showing ROIs. Sure, you could say all digital transformations are nebulous snake oil and don't deliver but I just don't think this is the case.
- deleted 2mo ago[deleted]
- cmiles8 2mo agoIf that was true then there wouldn’t be a giant ROI crisis fueling calls of an AI bubble burst imminent. If the answer was “the ROI is clear” then folks would just say that.
- stuartjohnson12 2mo agoThe debate about ROI isn't about whether everyone is going to throw their hands up and stop using AI tooling - the debate is about where that value is going to be captured. It's pretty clear that using some degree AI assistance for programming is on the whole faster and better than writing code by hand for the majority of applications, and it's clear that the degree to which it's better than writing code by hand is increasing quickly. I'm sure someone is going to reply to and say "actually it's not clear and the tech debt is about to explode everything real soon now" or something to that effect, but it's hard for me to explain this theoretically when it is so obvious in practice in my day to day.