It seems like a natural result. People have been trying to use dashboards / metrics to roll up / indicate how well teams and individuals have been doing for a long time. Therefore, "part 1" was already in place. Now, something even easier to track is available (token usage). So, just throw token usage on the dashboard and tell people that higher is better - what other outcome would you possibly expect?
> dashboards / metrics to roll up / indicate how well teams and individuals have been doing for a long time
I'm actually a little curious about how long it has been. Bad managers have always prioritized irrelevant metrics, of course, but I have a feeling (backed by no data, just vibes) that management in general crossed a point of no return as soon as "data-driven" became a cross-industry buzzword.
Like, I vaguely remember a time when consumer interactions didn't always come with a request to fill out a survey (with the results getting turned into a number and fed into a dashboard somewhere). And then that changed, and now everything must turned into a number and that number must go up.
"Data driven" essentially means "scalar driven". There is nothing wrong with it if your chosen scalar is a proxy for anything that matters. Of course, usually no one can explain this mapping.
I have some issues with docking and audio with Arch. Maybe I am asking too much to have a docking station work perhaps. I still don't feel the need to go back to Windows however.
Why do people even use docking stations anymore? I've never used one but I have used plenty of KVM-type devices that just work over various standard usb/display ports. What's the appeal of using the specialized "docking" port?
This is a ThinkPad USB-C docking station. I think it is basically the same as what you are talking about but if not, the main convenience is that you can plug in one cable which provides power, 2 external displays and a mouse. Super great if / when it works but not reliable with Arch (not blaming the distro specifically, it could be kernel or anything in the stack).
It won't be a career if AI gets good enough that you don't have to read / understand the code - otherwise, AI won't have much impact on jobs I don't think.
I suspect it isn't even really "greed". It is just the slow mold growth of an org chart optimizing comfort for itself instead of value for customers. Generally, startups / founders are the only anti-bodies against this type of behavior.
What a weird time for our industry. On one hand, small teams have never been able to move faster than right now.
On the other, the economy and market conditions are brutal for the little guys. Incumbent behemoths hoovering up value, talent and financing.
Instead of shaking things up as usual when a major paradigm shift hits, AI has mostly been a centralizing, consolidating force. Not that I was expecting it to be otherwise, but it's certainly dismaying to witness.
Or am I being too pessimistic / glorifying the past?
It's easier than ever to make your own furniture. IKEA is bigger than ever.
It's easier than ever to publish a video game. Steam is bigger than ever.
It's easier than ever to 3D-print tractor parts. John Deere is bigger than ever.
It's easier than ever to switch to solar power. The petroleum industry is bigger than ever.
One person reverse-engineered Coca Cola, made an exact taste-alike and published the formula. You can make some at home. Coca Cola is bigger than ever.
The hidden cost to competing in these industries is insane. Its so hard to build a physical product that can compete against a giant like IKEA. You need to make some with less r&d, less automation, less infrastructure and you're going to sell less units and all that needs to be price competitive against something that is made on an production line with a team of experienced engineers and sold to millions at fine margins.
> It's easier than ever to publish a video game. Steam is bigger than ever.
In this case: these statements aren't contradictory, they're complementary. It's easy to publish a game on Steam, where the audience are and the money is. It's also easy to publish on itch.io where no money is.
That depends, doesn't it? If I make it, it costs time instead of money. (Costs of tools are amortized over all the things I might make.) If I get it from IKEA, it costs money instead of time.
I think org chart the impact is how the individual person can advance their career while doing good work. If they only get rewarded for new things, service and maintenance suffers.
By lowering cost and not investing profit to the company? Yes, short-term v long-term, but who in this world cares about anything after their next salary?
It is fine until cognitive debt reaches a point where you have to essentially have re-write just so you understand it. Very good for speed running through a problem space.
Agree. There is so much focus on "let's do the same thing we are doing now with fewer people". It is very boring and uninspired. How about "let's do something that we couldn't do before", instead?
The author calls it out at the end but still spends a long time creating a false equivalency. Offshoring to humans in another country is not the same as having machines do work domestically. Really, the only thing that matters is:
"Maybe AI gets good enough, and the bet pays off. Maybe it doesn’t."
Of course, we are all wondering if AI will be good enough in 5 to 10 years such that you don't have to look at the code (at all). If so, then very few programmers will be needed it seems. If not, its possible that roughly the same number will be needed.
It seems oddly binary to me since as soon as you need to understand anything about the code, you have to effectively onboard yourself to a foreign codebase and develop the needed context.
reply