[data-ottawa]

I think a lot of this is just crappy bonus and incentive structures.

The execs want to they're using+selling AI, the investors want to believe AI can theoretically fire all the workers/drop your fixed costs, and the middle managers need to justify that they're on it by myopically pushing out features that increase the AI adoption metric.

The rushed push of AI features obviously trains your users that your AI is useless crap that just gets in the way. If you're going to do it's, make it limited and high quality first.

[woodruffw]

Yeah, completely agreed. It just seems like such a funny place to have those kinds of perverted incentives, given that this stuff is actually kind of useful and clearly has market fit!

[data-ottawa]

I use AI a ton and I pay for Claude happily. They've found an incredibly valuable niche and built the best products for it. I almost fail to see what value an AI editor has in comparison.

I've released a number of AI fearures at work, but they're focused on being good at one specific thing.