4 ms·

> ai code dev has enabled people to make tools for themselves that they didn't have before. ...that sounds pretty worthless tbh. The promise of AI wasn't that

by 27183 2mo ago

> ai code dev has enabled people to make tools for themselves that they didn't have before. ...that sounds pretty worthless tbh. The promise of AI wasn't that you can bang out your own little half baked duolingo clone. It was that every engineer was supposed to become hundreds or thousands of percent more productive. The assumption being that things generally would therefore get noticeably better. We're seeing hundreds of percent more commits. We're not seeing that translate to any real world improvement of anything. That's the problem. Call me "ignorant" if you want, but back it up by showing what all this "AI productivity" has actually accomplished in real economic terms. Not vaporware.

devrob 2mo ago
Out of curiosity, what real economic terms would you have to see to be convinced? Do you mean more earnings per share for corporations or real utility impacts on social systems (e.g., more new drugs) When I ask Claude about the AI ROI, it seems to cite that ~95% of AI PoC's are negative ROI but the 5% that do have ROI tend to have decent return -- my guess is mostly back office clean up to reduce expenses and increase revenue/profit. IIRC Uber claim their 1.5k/mo budget lead to no new value creation. FWIW, I look at the situation with similar skepticism. One argument you could make was what Marc Andreesen said with the hypothesis that "all the big companies get nuked", so no new valued gets created but the large market cap companies get eaten by thousands of little pirañas. Obviously, so far, that doesn't seem to be the case.
- 27183 2mo ago
  > Do you mean more earnings per share for corporations or real utility impacts on social systems (e.g., more new drugs) I mean real utility impacts. More reliable and efficient software, better features, etc. So far we've seen none of that. In fact, it seems like the opposite--more volume but a much lower quality product.

by 27183 2mo ago

devrob 2mo ago

Out of curiosity, what real economic terms would you have to see to be convinced? Do you mean more earnings per share for corporations or real utility impacts on social systems (e.g., more new drugs) When I ask Claude about the AI ROI, it seems to cite that ~95% of AI PoC's are negative ROI but the 5% that do have ROI tend to have decent return -- my guess is mostly back office clean up to reduce expenses and increase revenue/profit. IIRC Uber claim their 1.5k/mo budget lead to no new value creation. FWIW, I look at the situation with similar skepticism. One argument you could make was what Marc Andreesen said with the hypothesis that "all the big companies get nuked", so no new valued gets created but the large market cap companies get eaten by thousands of little pirañas. Obviously, so far, that doesn't seem to be the case.

27183 2mo ago
> Do you mean more earnings per share for corporations or real utility impacts on social systems (e.g., more new drugs) I mean real utility impacts. More reliable and efficient software, better features, etc. So far we've seen none of that. In fact, it seems like the opposite--more volume but a much lower quality product.