←back to thread

502 points alazsengul | 4 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
pm90 ◴[] No.44564397[source]
I think the amount of turmoil around these deals is giving more weight to the possibility that we’re in a massive bubble thats quite divorced from any kind of fundamentals. Sooner or later the bubbles gonna burst.
replies(13): >>44564436 #>>44564444 #>>44564507 #>>44564837 #>>44564856 #>>44564871 #>>44565061 #>>44566422 #>>44568840 #>>44570092 #>>44570792 #>>44571345 #>>44572790 #
nikcub ◴[] No.44564871[source]
> divorced from any kind of fundamentals

Anthropic ARR went $1B -> $4B in the first half of this year. They're getting my $200 a month and it's easily the best money I spend. There's definitely something there.

replies(22): >>44564952 #>>44564962 #>>44565035 #>>44565278 #>>44565374 #>>44565387 #>>44565422 #>>44565447 #>>44565517 #>>44565637 #>>44565761 #>>44565844 #>>44566449 #>>44567425 #>>44568353 #>>44569351 #>>44569976 #>>44570595 #>>44571349 #>>44572134 #>>44575913 #>>44579934 #
benjaminwootton ◴[] No.44564952[source]
I’ve always dwelled over $5 a month subscriptions for iPhone apps due to subscription fatigue. I find myself signing up for $200 AI subscriptions without a moments hesitation.
replies(4): >>44564959 #>>44565436 #>>44565470 #>>44566163 #
smith7018 ◴[] No.44564959[source]
I hope both of you know that you're in the extreme minority, right?
replies(4): >>44564984 #>>44565017 #>>44565258 #>>44565386 #
1. bicx ◴[] No.44565386[source]
Are there available numbers to support this? Software engineering in the U.S. is well-compensated. $200/mo is a small amount to pay if it makes a big difference in productivity.
replies(2): >>44566143 #>>44575747 #
2. benburleson ◴[] No.44566143[source]
Which raises the question: If the productivity gains are realized by the employer, is the employer not paying this subscription?
replies(1): >>44566561 #
3. unshavedyak ◴[] No.44566561[source]
My day job in talks to do that. I'm partly responsible for that decision, and i'm using my personal $200/m plan to test the idea.

My assessment so far is that it is well worth it, but only if you're invested in using the tool correctly. It can cause as much harm as it can increase productivity and i'm quite fearful of how we'll handle this at day-job.

I also think it's worth saying that imo, this is a very different fear than what drives "butts in seats" arguments. Ie i'm not worried that $Company will not get their value out of the Engineer and instead the bot will do the work for them. I'm concerned that Engineer will use the tool poorly and cause more work for reviewers having to deal with high LOC.

Reviews are difficult and "AI" provides a quick path to slop. I've found my $200 well worth it, but the #1 difficulty i've had is not getting features to work, but in getting the output to be scalable and maintainable code.

Sidenote, one of the things i've found most productive is deterministic tooling wrapping the LLM. Eg robust linters like Rust Clippy set to automatically run after Claude Code (via hooks) helps bend the LLM away from many bad patterns. It's far from perfect of course, but it's the thing i think we need most atm. Determinism around the spaghetti-chaos-monkeys.

4. joks ◴[] No.44575747[source]
Perceived productivity or actual productivity?