This is a great point! Reminds me of Agentic software development. When it doesn't work out it's only evidence that you could have used more agents.

You can never use enough tokens.

▲

Erndob 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

Which also conveniently makes you spend more money on tokens.

With agile, at least no one was charging you for it. Like sure, there’s a cost to the process. But there wasn’t direct agile.com profiting from you.

Meanwhile agentic workflows every solution to the problem is giving more money to the ai companies.

Model is bad? Made more expensive model. Still bad? Here’s an infrastructure that reads huge text files again and again making you consume tokens. Still bad? Here’s a way to easily spin up multiple agents at once so you can delegate work. Still bad? Here’s a new service that will automatically review code. Still bad? Maybe a biggger more expensive model will help.

	▲	f1shy 2 days ago \| parent \| next [-]
		>> With agile, at least no one was charging you for it. Depends. There are companies [1] making loads of money out of it. Charging for certification and imposing the idea that either you are certified, or you are going to fail. They are even eating the lunch of PMI, as PMI (PMBoK) is turning into an Agile manual. Where I work is being expended literally millions per year in Agile. [1] https://scaledagile.com/what-is-safe/
	▲	nailer 2 days ago \| parent \| prev [-]
		> With agile, at least no one was charging you for it. Charging people for Agile via his company ThoughtWorks (which sold for 785M) is how Neville Roy Singham made the money to fund far left groups in the US from his base in China.

▲

locknitpicker 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

> This is a great point! Reminds me of Agentic software development. When it doesn't work out it's only evidence that you could have used more agents.

A concept older than agentic software development is bad workmen blaming his tools.

I mean, if you can't possibly hammer a nail then is it reasonable to blame the hammer?

▲

duskdozer 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

If it's an internet-required smarthammer without a handle that instead hits out on voice prompt, sometimes without enough or with too much force, sometimes knocks the nail out of the way and punches a hole, and sometimes hits you in the face, then yeah

▲

locknitpicker 2 days ago | parent [-]

> If it's an internet-required smarthammer without a handle that (...)

A suitable comparison would be to be faced with a nailgun and proceeding to criticize it on the grounds it doesn't have a handle, it doesn't pull nails, and it requires electricity to run.

While you complain about those detailed those using nailguns are an order of magnitude more productive at the same task, and can still carry a hammer in their toolbelt.

▲

duskdozer 2 days ago | parent | next [-]

I originally was writing the post using a nailgun, but decided someone would criticize it for straying too far away from a hammer. Alas.

▲

locknitpicker 2 days ago | parent [-]

> I originally was writing the post using a nailgun, but decided someone would criticize it for straying too far away from a hammer. Alas.

The point is still unaddressed, isn't it?

	▲	duskdozer a day ago \| parent [-]
		Well, no, the examples are basically the same. A wifi nailgun that sometimes shoots a nail straight through the board, doesn't shoot one at all, shoots it randomly to the side, shoots you with it, etc.

▲

cindyllm 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

[dead]

▲

andersmurphy 2 days ago | parent | prev | next [-]

Clearly they didn't use enough hammer. Screws always require the most hammer. Common knowledge to any certified practitioner of Hammer™[1].

- [1] Get 20% off your Hammer Master™ certificate with referral code THUMBPAIN

▲

Ekaros 2 days ago | parent | prev [-]

You can use brick as hammer. Doesn't mean brick makes a good hammer or that person who tells that brick is a bad hammer and doesn't work from them is bad workman.