this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
784 points (97.8% liked)

Technology

77090 readers
3049 users here now

This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.


Our Rules


  1. Follow the lemmy.world rules.
  2. Only tech related news or articles.
  3. Be excellent to each other!
  4. Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
  5. Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
  6. Politics threads may be removed.
  7. No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
  8. 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.
  9. Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
  10. Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.

Approved Bots


founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 

Just want to clarify, this is not my Substack, I'm just sharing this because I found it insightful.

The author describes himself as a "fractional CTO"(no clue what that means, don't ask me) and advisor. His clients asked him how they could leverage AI. He decided to experience it for himself. From the author(emphasis mine):

I forced myself to use Claude Code exclusively to build a product. Three months. Not a single line of code written by me. I wanted to experience what my clients were considering—100% AI adoption. I needed to know firsthand why that 95% failure rate exists.

I got the product launched. It worked. I was proud of what I’d created. Then came the moment that validated every concern in that MIT study: I needed to make a small change and realized I wasn’t confident I could do it. My own product, built under my direction, and I’d lost confidence in my ability to modify it.

Now when clients ask me about AI adoption, I can tell them exactly what 100% looks like: it looks like failure. Not immediate failure—that’s the trap. Initial metrics look great. You ship faster. You feel productive. Then three months later, you realize nobody actually understands what you’ve built.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] zerofk@lemmy.zip 29 points 22 hours ago (3 children)

That sounds awful. You get someone who doesn’t really know the company or product, they take a bunch of decisions that fundamentally affect how you work, and then they’re gone.

… actually, that sounds exactly like any other company.

[–] bigfondue@lemmy.world 19 points 22 hours ago

It's smart. Not every company has a clueless rich guy to hand all the money to

[–] rainwall@piefed.social 8 points 20 hours ago* (last edited 20 hours ago)

Ive worked with a fractional CISO. He was scattered, but was insanly useful about setting roadmaps, writting procedure/docs, working audits and correcting us moving in bad cybersecurity directions.

Fractional is way better than none.

[–] Telodzrum@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago

That’s more what a consultant is. A “Fractional C[insert function here]O is permanent or at least long-term. It just means the firm doesn’t have the resources and need for a full-time executive in that role. I’ve worked with fractional CTO, CIO, CFO, and CMO executives at different companies and they’ve all been required to have the company, industry, market, etc. knowledge that a non-fractional employee would. Honestly, this concept has been wonderful for small to midsize companies.