this post was submitted on 07 Dec 2025
803 points (97.9% liked)

Technology

77090 readers
3041 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
[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 6 points 21 hours ago (1 children)

At work there's a lot of rituals where processes demand that people write long internal documents that no one will read, but management will at least open it up, scroll and be happy to see such long documents with credible looking diagrams, but never read them, maybe looking at a sentence or two they don't know, but nod sagely at.

LLM can generate such documents just fine.

Incidentally an email went out to salespeople. It told them they didn't need to know how to code or even have technical skills, they code just use Gemini 3 to code up whatever a client wants and then sell it to them. I can't imagine the mind that thinks that would be a viable business strategy, even if it worked that well.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 2 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

fantastic for pumping a bubble though, to idiots with more $ than sense

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 3 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, this one is going to hurt. I'm pretty sure my rather long career will be toast as my company and mostly my network of opportunities are all companies that are bought so hard into the AI hype that I don't know that they will be able to survive that going away.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

if you don't mind compromising your morales somewhat and have moderate understanding of how the stock ~~market~~ casino works...loads of $ to be made when pops, atleast

[–] jj4211@lemmy.world 5 points 18 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, but mispredicting that would hurt. The market can stay irrational longer than I can stay solvent, as they say.

[–] IronBird@lemmy.world 1 points 18 hours ago

eh, not if you know how it works. basic hedging and not shorting stuff limits your risk significantly.

especially in a bull market where ratfucking and general fraud is out in thebopen for all to see