| ▲ | copperx 5 hours ago |
| It's a matter of weeks/months before they'll host a complete webapp, not just a site. The Saaspocalypse will be complete. |
|
| ▲ | corytheboyd 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| On one hand, I am incredibly tired of seeing the absolute train wreck of waste that is suave founders taking millions and blowing it on hundreds of personnel who do practically nothing— especially having seen what a single person can do with these tools. On the other hand, death of a livelihood in a social structure that doesn’t care about you. We’ve always had pump-and-dump trash. The terrible stuff loses and the good stuff wins. I don’t see why that would change. The companies that ditch the management structures of yore and successfully build better software faster with the new tools will come out on top. I don’t think these companies will replace ALL saas subscriptions with in-house solutions, because one huge benefit of paying someone else to hold that bag is liability and regulatory overhead. |
| |
| ▲ | htrp 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | look at the accounting firms, you'll just have four or five companies that switch off between who holds the bag |
|
|
| ▲ | weitendorf 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| They’ve both been working on this for a while, I’m surprised they still haven’t launched. Domains, auth, and databases are probably the stickiest software products of all time. I suspect it’s a combo of security concerns and the risk of eroding goodwill among developers (their most important customer base rn) if they move up the stack too quickly. Once you know that the goal is to become cloud vendors, train on/compete with their own customers, and own the entire software stack e2e it’s hard to really feel grateful that they’re dragging it out but planning on doing it anyway. For those of us working in infra/SaaS outside these companies it’s pretty clear that the only viable path that doesn’t involve getting cannibalized is training your own agents/models. The new coding agent-infra-data business model is a path towards full commoditization and undifferentiated prompting in 3-4 vertically integrated walled gardens. If you ever start making real money on pure software infra they’ll just be able to eat you alive by implementing something similar, training on their own tools rather than yours, and integrating it into their stack (which all of your customers are on already). Also, you should only ever use $20-200/mo subscriptions on work you want them to train against or you don’t mind automate yourself out of. Think a little bit about what you’re teaching them to do when you use their products, especially if they’re the primary interface you’re working in. People are going to start caring about this a lot when the AI companies feel safe enough to begin the “extinguish” phase of AI coding. Train your own models! |
| |
| ▲ | dennisy 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | This is truly depressing and most likely very true. I do not see enough people discussing this and trying to position their businesses in a way to avoid destruction at the hands of the labs. | | |
| ▲ | weitendorf 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | It’s really only an existential problem for pure-software businesses/developers. There’s a good chance that the next step after open weight models is something that makes it easier to post-train existing models on new workloads without running an entire pipeline just for yourself. Somebody has to actually build it though. |
|
|
|
| ▲ | Fergusonb 5 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I think this has always been the end result - when the user can enter a business problem and it spins up a site, and they don't have to think about the hosting, database, app, etc. Vibe coding full circle And it will be good enough for 90% of use cases. |
| |
| ▲ | datsci_est_2015 an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | > And it will be good enough for 90% of use cases. I think it’ll just raise the automation bar that much higher. In other words, it will be good enough for 90% of yesterday’s use-cases. But tomorrow’s? I’m bearish. I imagine the amount of onerous bureaucracy when interacting with any entity is going to explode if they expect you to do it in an automated fashion, for both private companies and the government. Especially as roles are cut because they can be “automated”. Except only 80% of the workload can be reliably automated, the other 20% requires a long tail of effort. | |
| ▲ | carlosjobim 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | And whose neck can you choke when an error from the AI generated site forces you to refund customers or something worse? | | |
| ▲ | bushbaba 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Its not for those uses cases. though. THink about squarespace/wix hosting all the company landing pages, restaurant menus, daycares. This will replace it. | | |
| ▲ | camdenreslink 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | In my area many of those use cases are handled by Facebook pages already. For the general public this might still seem too technical. |
|
| |
| ▲ | avs733 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | given the percentage of business processes that still run on a manually updated spreadsheet, I am not sure that is actually worse. It is likely better in some ways and worse in others...and few of hte people involved will have the understanding to tell the difference. |
|
|
| ▲ | jr3592 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| Honest question for devs out there... is anyone worried? I don't see enough frank conversation happening around this subject. Timelines. How long until salaries fall? Is it too early to stalk thinking about back up plans? Am I crazy? |
| |
| ▲ | tripleee 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | You're not crazy. I think there's still room for the top 5% of devs working on genuinely hard technical problems.. but I don't see a bright future for the rest. | |
| ▲ | weitendorf 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | There’s going to be a lot of chaos at some point but I think that “hybrid builders” (scientists, sales people, product developers, etc). true specialists, and new opportunities in hw/robotics/training/ will soak up a lot of talent, and be rewarding to work in. Feels very sadly k-shaped. Software engineering on one end is going to be more like finance or medicine where the cost of poor performance is actually higher than the risk that they wont be worth what you pay them (ie there isn’t any amount of pay where it’s worth it to hire them). Then on the other it’ll be like knowing how to use PowerPoint. All the new tech categories have too many bottlenecks and challenges beyond just producing code to consolidate like that. | |
| ▲ | CuriouslyC 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Salaries won't fall, they'll go up. The number of roles is what'll fall. SWE is going to become a giant game of musical chairs, and people who can't find a seat will get pushed into human facing roles ("product" / "technical sales" / "customer support" ). | |
| ▲ | ActionHank 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | No. Saas hedge is to offer solid api + mcp for agents to use whilst still maintaining their own products alongside. That's it, that's the whole thing. Are you going to trust a vendor who has been running for years with your business critical operations or brad_69's awesome saas skills and agents? Do you think these businesses are going to shift their whole product to be in Altman's walled garden when they don't need to? | |
| ▲ | aduwah 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | In a corporate environment the ability to code does not substitute a decent software engineer. | |
| ▲ | vlucas 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Nah. Website builders have been around for a long time in various forms. This isn't much different. | |
| ▲ | bartekrutkowski 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | I've said it before but I'll repeat it here until someone changes my mind: jobs in IT are safe until using AI gets its equivalent of "no one ever got fired for buying IBM". Until there can be financial and legal responsibility for when things go bad, people are going to be needed.
Once it's so good AI labs will be happy to accept liability, it's game over. It was never about code quality. | |
| ▲ | codingdave 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Slapping up a slop website is no threat to professional tech folk. When they have full DevOps, with multiple environments for testing, compliance with security best practices, can do database updates and data migrations, move the app smoothly between different platforms, streamline costs, and scale to at least hundreds of thousands (if not millions) of users without crashing and burning... then go ahead and worry. We aren't anywhere near that. On the other hand, if you are purely a coder, and cannot run a project that does all of the above... maybe start your worrying earlier. | | |
| ▲ | win311fwg 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | > We aren't anywhere near that. We aren't, but the AI Labs no doubt are. They just can't release it right now because their bread and butter is still developers burning tokens, so there is still a business problem to solve. |
| |
| ▲ | dyauspitr 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | Coding is probably solved. Honestly it’s probably going to be 5 years of runtime starting now depending on industry lag and uptake. A team I was managing spent a whole year converting government forms into a web app. It took a while and there was a lot of discussion with the end users and a bunch of back and forth (keep in mind this is government software with a lot of onerous legal requirements). Then about 4 months ago, we just fed Codex the forms, along with the UI design and the legal requirements and it spat it out in 1 hour. Was it perfect? No. But our iterative loop became make the web app, show it to end users and then incorporate feedback and completely cut out the UX team, product etc. We were able to complete the conversion in 2 weeks with one guy (something like 150+ government forms/applications). For most simple to medium corporate development work it’s basically over. | | |
| ▲ | jr3592 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | We're in a similar boat. Entire eng team went full AI about a year ago, and honestly we're struggling to find things to do. Features that would take weeks, take minutes. I just don't see how we keep going like this without layoffs. The company cannot responsibly continue paying for this many engineers, when half, or less, could do the same job. | | |
| ▲ | creata 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Serious question from a consumer of software: if software can be improved so effortlessly now, why isn't it getting better? Like, why is it all still so buggy? Why does no website seem to consider 96 PPI displays in its design? Why don't we have ostensibly useful features like undo trees everywhere? Why is everything still a RAM hog? Why does the proportion of websites that pay no heed to accessibility seem to be going up rather than down? I'm told we're living in the future, but it sure doesn't feel like it. | | |
| ▲ | jr3592 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | For the same reason that increasing headcount never really solved the bug problem. Flawless software isn't the goal, ever. Feature development is almost always the primary goal, and fixing bugs and performance issues is only done if the bug is bad enough. | | |
| ▲ | creata an hour ago | parent [-] | | I don't think you're wrong overall, and it jives with tripleee's reply, but I don't think wanting end-user software to be less buggy than it currently is is asking for "flawless" software. |
| |
| ▲ | tripleee 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because those don't increase business revenue. People aren't making their buying decisions off that | |
| ▲ | copperx 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Because it hasn't been that long since the November singularity. | |
| ▲ | win311fwg 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > why isn't it getting better? Lack of information. When you are on the building side you become blind to its faults. Consumers almost never tell you what isn't good about it. > why is it all still so buggy? Also lack of information. I haven't seen any bugs in years in the things I've worked on. LLMs have closed every last obvious testing gap, squashing any outstanding bugs there. That's not to say it is all bug-free now, but what bugs users may be experiencing aren't being reported. AI is good at building software, but it is still not good at consuming software like actual consumers do. |
| |
| ▲ | gopher_space 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | If your company isn't throwing you into R&D right now everyone is looking at layoffs. You are no longer in an environment where doing "the same job" will keep you afloat. | |
| ▲ | win311fwg 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | > honestly we're struggling to find things to do. I have been the lone developer on a project for quite some time and was already feeling that way. Yet, recently found out that a second is being added to the team and a third is to come. I guess I'll enjoy what is effectively a paid vacation before it all comes crumbling down. |
| |
| ▲ | bushbaba 3 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | You'll need less people but not no people. | | |
| ▲ | dyauspitr 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | Yeah, probably 10% of our current workforce is all that’s needed. | | |
| ▲ | bushbaba 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | You could argue this was true prior to AI. A lot of the workforce is doing questionable value bureaucracy |
|
|
|
|
|
| ▲ | pazimzadeh 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What do you mean in a few months? Yesterday my dot made a web app to view 3D microscopy files https://mucus-atlas-viewer.pazimzadeh.chatgpt.site/?sample=k... I didn't even know about the sites feature |
|
| ▲ | andix 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I don't think this provides a lot of value for more complex applications. It just lowers the bar for getting started. Once the app gets a bit more complex, it won't be that much different to any more traditionally vibe coded application (code, git/pr, test, deploy, ops). It only removes the barrier to get started, but doesn't solve any of the real problems. Problems like AI slop, code rot, bad architecture, security issues, data loss/breach because of bad code, and so on. |
|
| ▲ | fassssst 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It is a complete web app, with a Cloudflare backend. |
|
| ▲ | nathanfig 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I mean, with a Cloudflare API key you can pretty much already do that. But keeping your data straight and putting in the right authentication guards, etc. are all still where the business problems meet technical and the AI is not enough unless the agent is both architect and customer. |
|
| ▲ | nozzlegear 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The Saaspocalypse was a wet fart that never went anywhere. People aren't using these AI tools to kill or replace SaaS at their jobs as much as HN wants us to believe. https://www.stripeeconomics.com/p/the-saaspocalypse-was-more... |
| |
| ▲ | ameliaquining 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | The argument there wasn't that everyone everywhere would use individually customized software* instead of packaged SaaS; it was that, because AI greatly reduces the cost of building an internal app or service, it improves enterprises' BATNA when dealing with SaaS vendors, which means surplus will shift from producers to consumers. It's not obvious to me that that's not happening, since it may have been masked by a general increase in automation since AI also synergizes significantly with SaaS. (The Stripe Economics post gets into this a little, though it's mostly less curious than I'd like about why the "SaaSpocalypse" didn't materialize. Of course, Stripe has an economic interest here.) * Some people do think this (e.g., https://sockpuppet.org/blog/2026/09/25/what-even-is-an-os-no...), but I remain somewhat skeptical that this'll be true for the most economically significant applications. This is not because I'm an AI capabilities skeptic (I'm not, I'm more of a doomer), but because even in a world where AI is designing and implementing all the software, there are probably still significant benefits to standardization. I see it as sort of analogous to compilers; we might get a world where compilers are both used and maintained almost exclusively by LLMs, but we probably won't get one where compilers stop being used or maintained at all because LLMs write everything in assembly. | | |
| ▲ | tripledry 2 hours ago | parent [-] | | In stuff like wikis and ticket systems what I see is people now just making their own little tools around the ones we already use, this arguably just sements their position even deeper. Also I dont get the inhouse argument, you dont really save anything. So instead of paying X to SaaS, you now propose to pay X to anthropic instead AND maintain said SaaS... what? how is that better, that just shifted the cost to another company and you got the burden of maintenance and responsibility. | | |
|
|
|
| ▲ | axus 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Except for the companies that pay anti-competition money to OpenAI: cloning their applications will be restricted. |