undefined | Better HN

0 pointsMajimasEyepatch9mo ago0 comments

But presumably you could have built it before, just slower, which is the point. For now, that speed-up just looks like a win because it’s novel, but eventually the speed-up will be baked into people’s expectations.

0 comments

ai-christianson9mo ago

Right, I'm just pointing out that if you're "never going to get there anyway," then going 4x faster isn't going to help.

lazide9mo ago

The biggest issue at most companies is making a lot of heat and noise while not actually delivering effectively, so I expect AI to make this problem worse.

Usually, companies benefit more from slowing down and prioritizing, not ‘going faster’.

eru9mo ago

> For now, that speed-up just looks like a win because it’s novel, but eventually the speed-up will be baked into people’s expectations.

It will still be a win: the rewards for the new productivity have to go somewhere in the economy.

Just like other productivity improvements in the past, it will likely be shared amongst various stakeholders depending on a variety of factors. The workers will get the lion's share.

bluefirebrand9mo ago

> rewards for the new productivity have to go somewhere in the economy

Unless it goes to me I'm not entirely sure why I should care

I'll keep doing things the old way thanks, unless I personally get some benefit from it

"You are more productive but compensated the same" just shows how many of you are suckers

eru9mo ago

Compare and contrast https://pseudoerasmus.com/2017/10/02/ijd/

layer89mo ago

> The workers will get the lion's share.

This doesn’t seem to be supported by history.

eru9mo ago

Labour share have GDP has held roughly constant throughout the ages, even as we saw massive productivity increases since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse

0 comments

ai-christianson9mo ago

Right, I'm just pointing out that if you're "never going to get there anyway," then going 4x faster isn't going to help.

lazide9mo ago

The biggest issue at most companies is making a lot of heat and noise while not actually delivering effectively, so I expect AI to make this problem worse.

Usually, companies benefit more from slowing down and prioritizing, not ‘going faster’.

eru9mo ago

> For now, that speed-up just looks like a win because it’s novel, but eventually the speed-up will be baked into people’s expectations.

It will still be a win: the rewards for the new productivity have to go somewhere in the economy.

Just like other productivity improvements in the past, it will likely be shared amongst various stakeholders depending on a variety of factors. The workers will get the lion's share.

bluefirebrand9mo ago

> rewards for the new productivity have to go somewhere in the economy

Unless it goes to me I'm not entirely sure why I should care

I'll keep doing things the old way thanks, unless I personally get some benefit from it

"You are more productive but compensated the same" just shows how many of you are suckers

eru9mo ago

Compare and contrast https://pseudoerasmus.com/2017/10/02/ijd/

layer89mo ago

> The workers will get the lion's share.

This doesn’t seem to be supported by history.

eru9mo ago

Labour share have GDP has held roughly constant throughout the ages, even as we saw massive productivity increases since the dawn of the industrial revolution.

1 more reply

j / k navigate · click thread line to collapse