←back to thread

The AI wildfire is coming. it's going to be painful and healthy

(ceodinner.substack.com)
117 points LordAtlas | 10 comments | 07 Dec 25 16:43 UTC | HN request time: 0s | source | bottom
Show context
8f2ab37a-ed6c ◴[07 Dec 25 19:03 UTC] No.46184133[source]▶
With little growth and hiring happening outside of firms betting the farm on AI—and getting the funding to stay alive and play the lottery—what is a random tech employee supposed to do here?

It seems like right now the most rational move to stay in the industry is to milk the AI wave as much as possible, learn all of the tools, get a big brand name on one's resume, and then land somewhere still-alive once the AI music stops? But ultimately if nothing outside of AI is growing, it's one big game of musical chairs and even that might not save you?

replies(5): >>46184165 #>>46184443 #>>46185266 #>>46185654 #>>46185917 #
karlgkk ◴[07 Dec 25 19:09 UTC] No.46184165[source]▶
That “rational move” has always been a good move, regardless of AI. This is a boom/bust industry, and the next boom will come in a few years. While we’re at it, if you’re making engineer money, you should be targeting retirement at 50. I’m not saying you have to do that, but it sure helps to have that option.
replies(2): >>46184717 #>>46184783 #
delfinom ◴[07 Dec 25 20:21 UTC] No.46184783[source]▶
> if you’re making engineer money,

SV & big tech engineer money.

Majority of engineering fields do not make that kind of money to retire at 50. Comfortable compared to the rest of the country, sure.

replies(4): >>46184901 #>>46185333 #>>46185543 #>>46186178 #
1. onraglanroad ◴[07 Dec 25 21:28 UTC] No.46185333{3}[source]▶
When you can retire depends on how little you need.

Though, of course, if you're living from investment income you should be aware you're living off the work of other people.

replies(2): >>46185439 #>>46190722 #
2. anonymars ◴[07 Dec 25 21:40 UTC] No.46185439[source]▶
Unless you're churning your own butter and manufacturing your own solar panels, isn't retirement inherently living off other people regardless of income?
replies(2): >>46185593 #>>46185637 #
3. reactordev ◴[07 Dec 25 21:56 UTC] No.46185593[source]▶
Isn’t social security living off the backs of other people too?
replies(2): >>46186534 #>>46193616 #
4. incompatible ◴[07 Dec 25 22:00 UTC] No.46185637[source]▶
Isn't getting wages in a wealthy country so that you can afford a multiple of work hours from poorly-paid people elsewhere inherently living off other people?
replies(1): >>46186530 #
5. anonymars ◴[07 Dec 25 23:33 UTC] No.46186530{3}[source]▶
If one makes more as a software developer than a bus driver, it doesn't seem like location was the factor

Isn't the logical extension that everyone lives off other people?

This was basically the point of "you didn't build that" (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/You_didn%27t_build_that)

replies(1): >>46189931 #
6. anonymars ◴[07 Dec 25 23:34 UTC] No.46186534{3}[source]▶
Childhood too, no? Maybe it turns out life was the original "pyramid scheme"
replies(1): >>46191071 #
7. Lapsa ◴[08 Dec 25 08:48 UTC] No.46189931{4}[source]▶
you want to live off another people to some degree. single farmer can feed hundreds - there is no need for everyone to do everything. which of course raises societal fairness and trust issues
8. ndsipa_pomu ◴[08 Dec 25 10:33 UTC] No.46190722[source]▶
It's just slavery with extra steps
9. reactordev ◴[08 Dec 25 11:29 UTC] No.46191071{4}[source]▶
Childhood was that new car smell and your parents dreaming of the kind of equity they’ll get only to get frustrated with all the maintenance.
10. onraglanroad ◴[08 Dec 25 15:45 UTC] No.46193616{3}[source]▶
Yes, they both are, it's just less obvious for investment income.