| ▲ | Esophagus4 5 hours ago |
| Unfortunately not everything will cleanly show up in PnL, which is a function of the entire company’s processes. If developers are shipping more code (and most of the enablement is in software right now) does that show up in top line? Maybe… if sales and marketing are also selling more, and product people are building the right thing, and… It’s not a straight line from AI -> $$$ |
|
| ▲ | paaloeye 4 hours ago | parent | next [-] |
| btw, shipping more code isn't necessary a good thing. If quality isn't controlled properly, it eventually shows up as negative in the top line. With AI, keeping good quality gets even harder because it normally only produces tricky defects. |
| |
| ▲ | Grombobulous 2 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | It’s not just code quality, it’s all the other business fundamentals like the product itself having value. I see this in a very non-AI way working at a company that’s a hodgepodge of acquisitions. Some of our products just don’t make a lot of money, don’t resonate, or are behind the competition in various ways. The amount of code or general engineering complexity of the application seems completely detached from profitability a lot of times. Now the bar is going to be higher for software to actually be worth buying when it’s so easy to make your own for yourself, so that also means that our ability to pump out code loses value. | |
| ▲ | Esophagus4 3 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Maybe? But I also think: - there are a lot of companies that don’t need to be 5 9s[1] - I have a feeling it’s possible to ship fast without drastic quality drops [1] Claude code is 99.85% available and is one of the world’s most important products | | |
| ▲ | paaloeye 3 hours ago | parent [-] | | > world’s most important products Really? If we delete CC today, will humanity stop functioning? Nope.
It's so far from one of the world's most important products. About 5 9s, reliability is just one of the axes which suffers from fast generation. There are a lot more: architecture, accuracy, etc... > I have a feeling it’s possible to ship fast without drastic quality drops at what scale and for how long? |
| |
| ▲ | Supermancho an hour ago | parent | prev [-] | | > btw, shipping more code isn't necessary a good thing. This is FUD. It isn't necessarily a good or bad thing. At the very least, using AI to audit your code is responsible use. The testing is the same as it ever was. If there was a chronic problem with shipped AI assisted code, it would be a popular talking point. > If quality isn't controlled properly, it eventually shows up as negative in the top line. This an idealistic pillar of capitalism that has been falsified across time. Depending on what someone means by "controlled properly", I don't think this wasn't been true before AI and I don't think it's demonstrated post-AI. Momentum (notably capture) keeps the software markets resistant to quality defects. |
|
|
| ▲ | s1artibartfast 4 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| It can also be the case that it has zero impact on PnL, but is now necessary to operate a competitive business and keep up with competition. |
|
| ▲ | claytongulick 5 hours ago | parent | prev [-] |
| > It’s not a straight line from AI -> $$$ That seems like it might be a bit of a problem for those frontier model CEOs who have been making exactly the opposite claims. |
| |
| ▲ | Esophagus4 3 hours ago | parent | next [-] | | Is it? Most of the claims I’ve seen are around productivity (bottom line). And while it’s hard to say “we would’ve had to hire more devs to be this productive without Claude” it kind of feels like the case, doesn’t it? | |
| ▲ | skydhash 4 hours ago | parent | prev [-] | | It should be especially when new features are used to hook new customers (or renew contracts) and lower the amount of time wasted on bugs… |
|
