697
GitHub CEO delivers stark message to developers: Embrace AI or get out.
(www.businessinsider.com)
this post was submitted on 05 Aug 2025
697 points (97.0% liked)
Technology
73740 readers
4687 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
I don't get it. AI is a tool. My CEO didn't care about what tools I use, as long as I got the job done. Why do they suddenly think they have to force us to use a certain tool to get the job done? They are clueless, yet they think they know what we need.
Because unlike with the other tools you use the CEO of your company is investing millions of dollars into AI and they want a big return on their investment.
Return? No, there is no return on investment from AI. If there really was a return to be had from Devs, you wouldn't have to force them to use it.
This is a saving face and covering their asses exercise. Option 1 is "We spent the money, nobody's using it, the bubbles gonna burst", the other choice is "if we can ramp up the usage numbers before the earnings call, we can get some of that sweet investor money to buy us out of being mauled by our shareholders".
It's shitty management, making shitty decisions to cover up their previous shitty decisions
That's the point though. These CEOs don't know that there is not going to be an "AI revolution". They all think they are getting in on the ground floor of the next Google or Facebook. They genuinely believe that these "AI's" are going to revolutionize the Internet.
That's exactly why Elmo went from "AI is too dangerous and development on it must be stopped" to "I'm gonna built the best AI ever and I'll call it Grok cause I want everyone to think I'm a relatable sci-fi nerd."
At this stage,I can't believe that they are stupid enough to believe the shit that comes out of their mouths. Hence I say that it's not about the return from AI, but riding the bubble before it pops, and justifying their stupidity to others by force feeding the crap they spent their money on down our throats in the hope that we don't just throw it up on them
I don't think these CEOs have quite figured out that LLM developers are creating something that can more easily replace a CEO than a developer.
Not just that... why do they have to threat and push for people to use a tool that allegedly is fantastic and makes everything better and faster?... the answer is that it does not work but they need to pump the numbers to keep the bubble going
I think part of it is because they think they can train models off developers, then replace them with models. The other is that the company is heavily invested in coding LLMs and the tooling for them, so they are trying to hype them up.
Accurate description of most managers i've encountered.
It's not about individual contributors using the right tools to get the job done. It's about needing fewer individual contributors in the first place.
If AI actually accomplishes what it's being sold as, a company can maintain or even increase its productivity with a fraction of its current spending on labor. Labor is one of the largest chunks of spending a company has so, if not the largest, so reducing that greatly reduces spending which means for same or higher company income, the net profit goes up and as always, the line must go up.
tl;dr Modern Capitalism is why they care
Alternatively, following their logic, keep the number of people and achieve massively higher productivity. But they don't want that, they want to reduce the number of people having opinions and diluting the share pool, because its not about productivity, its about exerting control.
Because like AI, your CEO is a tool.
Because they make money selling you the AI. It's that simple.
AI make money line go up. It's not clueless, he's trying to sell a kind of snake oil (ok, not "snake oil", I don't think AI is entirely bad).