top 20 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 15 points 2 months ago*

Yes, you'll be working less because we're replacing your team with AI

-management

One bill later from AWS...

Why is everything so expensive!

-still management

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 2 months ago

    Based on my AI enthusiast colleagues, I totally believe 100x productive.

    100 x 0 == 0

  • source
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    How do they even measure productivity? The line of code output?

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 9 points 2 months ago

    Neither is the case

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    Me, being 100x more productive

    Increasing spam phone calls by 100x

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 2 months ago

    "No Padme. I will be out of the job and fill repositories with my vibe coded slop free of charge."

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    I now start and abandon x10 more hobby projects every year, so yeah, my productivity is definitely up.

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (1 child)

    Generally people choose to work the same hours even when their productivity goes up because the opportunity cost of not working an hour goes up too

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 5 points 2 months ago
    [–] 5 points 2 months ago

    100x productivity boost? Then you must be working much less, and still making much more, right? Doesn't even need to reach that 100x figure, even say half the work hours and 2-3x the pay or 1/4 the work hours for the same pay would be great.

  • source
  • [–] 2 points 2 months ago (5 children)
  • [–] 5 points 2 months ago (2 children)

    If the original phrase was true and the market for software was saturated, the point would be that more productive people would outcompete you out of your job. The correct answer is to either get the most productivity possible so you'll end up a little richer, or switch careers.

    But both the original phrase is a lie and the market for software is nowhere close saturation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago*

    The market for regular food was completely saturated before fast food and highly processed food entered that market. The shittiest chefs weren't outcompeted by the best chefs. The market for regular food shrank a little perhaps, but the total market might have tripled in size. No one had expected back then that a) people would get this fat on average and b) that there would be this many people alive. I agree with your conclusion but it's naive to believe you see the future because you understand the past.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    100x, in much the same way that a team of 100 interns will. AI useful but lacking context.

  • source
  • [–] 1 point 2 months ago

    The word is "conscientious". AI is not conscientious because it has no interiority. Therefore, it doesn't actually take any responsibility for the work, which means it doesn't actually make you more productive.

    Similar to a calculator is great for adding numbers together, and a computer accelerates that, but woodworkers just use the lengths of the wood rather than calculating things.

  • source
  • [–] 0 points 2 months ago

    I work less these days with a bump of productivity and I'll be getting a sizable bump in salary eoy🤷‍♂️

    Win win in my situation for the moment.

  • source