[jcgrillo]

> We’re talking about each developer gradually boosting their productivity by a multiplier of ~5x by Q4 2025 (allowing for ramp-up time), for an additional amortized cost of only maybe $50k/year the first year. Who wouldn’t go for that deal?

OK, I'll take the other side of that bet. If in Q4 '25 devs using cursor or whatever are 5x as productive as me using emacs, I'll give this AI stuff another chance. But I'm pretty sure it won't happen.

[victorbjorklund]

You should probably compare the same dev using AI vs not using AI. Otherwise you can use that argument for anything.

Notepad is a better IDE than emacs if we compare a really good dev using notepad vs a shitty dev using emacs.

[jcgrillo]

Ok, if I notice other devs suddenly getting 5x as productive I'll give it a try, but so far no such effect has been demonstrated. It seems like a pretty straightforward research question, and you'd think if there was any demonstrable effect the companies selling these things would use such research to market their products. So where is it?

[fragmede]

There's a dead body lying there but you won't believe they're actually dead until someone creates a video reenactment of the killer stabbing them and shoves that video in your face?

Speaking of videos, https://youtu.be/opi1s_5Dm-c is probably below your level and it's kinda long.

[jcgrillo]

I don't get it. What is the dead body thing about?

[fragmede]

There are people building things and making money using these new techniques, but because they haven't stopped to produce research studies and white papers about their work, you want to presume it doesn't exist.

[jcgrillo]

Yes, without evidence there's no effect. It's telling that nowhere on cursor.ai's website do they appear to claim using their tool will actually make you, or crucially your team, more efficient.