Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

Now we are shifting the goalpost. Who even claimed AI solves 100%. I would even be damned if AI can solve 50% and it would be huge. Personally I don't even think current AI solves even the 50%.
 help



> Now we are shifting the goalpost. Who even claimed AI solves 100%.

I think you lost track of the discussion. I pointed out that in the absolute best case scenario LLMs only focus on tasks that represent a fraction of a software engineer's work.

Then, once you realize that, you will understand that the total gains of optimizing away the time taken on a fraction of a task only buys you a modest improvement on total performance. It can speed up a task, but it does not and cannot possibly eliminate the whole job.

To see what I mean, see Amdahl's law.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Amdahl%27s_law

Again, only a fraction of the tasks of a regular software engineering role involves writing code. Some high-profile roles claim their entry level positions at best spend 50% of their time writing code. If LLMs can magically get rid of said 50%,the total speedup is at best 2x speedup in delivery.

You can look at that and think to yourself "hey that's a lot". That is not what's being discussed here. I mean, read the blog post you are commenting on. What's being discussed is that LLMs reduce time spent on a fraction of the software development tasks, but work on other software engineering activities increases as it's no longer blocked by this bottleneck.

As others have wrote, the so-called AI doesn't reduce work: it intensifies it.

https://hbr.org/2026/02/ai-doesnt-reduce-work-it-intensifies...

Also, why do you think the phenomenon of AI-induced burnout, dubbed AI fatigue, is emerging? Processes are shifting, but the work is still there.


> the total speedup is at best 2x speedup in delivery

Which is just huge if we can get 2x speedup.




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: