[ehnto]

We're also not seeing much difference in real throughput at an agency. Everyone is getting decent results, output wise but it just doesn't seem to change the outcomes that much. There is also a mixed incentive at an agency, because a reduction in hours spent is a reduction in revenue.

It will be interesting to see how it all plays out, but I suspect if cost continues to increase and output only improves incrementally from here, that the cost will be the final decider rather than the competence.

I could see it being a thing we use only sometimes, for some things, but ultimately remain reliant on developers to get the work through the pipeline.

[whizzter]

API usage is on-demand, employees are a constant cost, guess what management loves most.

[ehnto]

That's true but employees offer more than code output, and you still need people operating the "machine" at this stage.

I am interested in how corporate politics evolves in this new environment. Usually all the way up the chain, managers and directors use head count as a measure of power and influence (and compensation). Who's going to pay a director top level pay when all they're doing is funneling requirements to various agents? That seems like a technical role that isn't particularly aligned with the soft skills management excel with either.

[port11]

Management seems disconnected from reality. Real employees accumulate tribal knowledge, have an almost infinite context, and don’t keep disabling unit tests because they don’t pass. They don’t really cost money if it’s information workers that build almost all of the modern service industry. It’s management that we should see as a cost center.