←back to thread

418 points speckx | 1 comments | | HN request time: 0s | source
Show context
JCM9 ◴[] No.44974621[source]
We are entering the “Trough of disillusionment.” These hype cycles are very predictable. GPT-5 being panned as a disappointment after endless hype may go down as GenAI’s “jump the shark” moment.

It’s all fun and games until the bean counters start asking for evidence of return on investment. GenAI folks better buckle up. Bumps ahead. The smart folks are already quietly preparing for a shift to ride the next hype wave up while others ride this train to the trough’s bottom.

Cue a bunch of increasingly desperate puff PR trying to show this stuff returns value.

replies(12): >>44974672 #>>44974721 #>>44974794 #>>44974830 #>>44974852 #>>44975105 #>>44975342 #>>44975381 #>>44975547 #>>44975669 #>>44975753 #>>44981385 #
highwaylights ◴[] No.44974672[source]
I wouldn’t be surprised if 95% of companies knew this was a money pit but felt obligated to burn a pile of money on it so as not to hurt the stock price.
replies(8): >>44974730 #>>44974803 #>>44974952 #>>44974990 #>>44975179 #>>44975354 #>>44975412 #>>44975966 #
lenerdenator ◴[] No.44974803[source]
I also wouldn't be surprised if bean counters were expecting a return in an unreasonable amount of time.

"Hey, guys, listen, I know that this just completely torched decades of best practices in your field, but if you can't show me progress in a fiscal year, I have to turn it down." - some MBA somewhere, probably, trying and failing yet again to rub his two brain cells together for the first time since high school.

Just agentic coding is a huge change. Like a years-to-grasp change, and the very nature of the changes that need to be made keep changing.

replies(5): >>44974920 #>>44974954 #>>44975109 #>>44975647 #>>44975784 #
1. potatolicious ◴[] No.44975784[source]
> "Hey, guys, listen, I know that this just completely torched decades of best practices in your field, but if you can't show me progress in a fiscal year, I have to turn it down."

I mean, this is basically how all R&D works, everywhere, minus the strawman bit about "single fiscal year", which isn't functionally true.

And this is a serious career tip: you need to get good at this. Being able to break down extremely ambitious, many-year projects into discrete chunks that prove progress and value is a fundamental skill to being able to do big things.

If a group of very smart people said "give us ${BILLIONS} and don't bother us for 15 years while we cook up the next world-shaking thing", the correct response to that is "no thanks". Not because we hate innovation, but because there's no way to tell the geniuses apart from the cranks, and there's not even a way to tell the geniuses-pursuing-dead-ends from the geniuses-pursuing-real-progress.

If you do want to have billions and 15 years to invent the next big thing, you need to be able to break the project up to milestones where each one represents convincing evidence that you're on the right track. It doesn't have to be on an annual basis, but it needs to be on some cadence.