give a man a fish and you feed him for a day
teach a man to Claude Code and you financially ruin him with distracting side projects for the rest of his life
We've reached a point where people who've never built a company have absolute certainty about how companies should be built. Meanwhile, founders who've spent years building one will openly admit how much they still don't know. The internet has created a strange world where those with the least experience often have the strongest opinions, while those with the most experience are expected to defend every word they say. It's remarkable how much easier entrepreneurship looks when the only thing you've ever built is an opinion about it.
I don't think existing people can't have the skill set. It's just a transition period while the market settles. Eventually they will rehire these folks.
For example, the pre- and post-internet era. A lot of money-making opportunities exist because the Internet exists.
Ex: No one could have thought that people with their phones would become bigger that bollywood/hollywood stars. Or you will be able to make money from social media.
My point is, till everything settles, big companies don't see a point in keeping a large workforce. Because everyone is waiting (their customers), companies aren't investing in the current worldview right now, hence everyone is waiting, cash flow is minimized == No budget for large workforce.
I keep seeing the same thing in big companies. 3 year AI roadmap, by month nine there is a programme with a name and no users. meanwhile someone in ops has quietly wired a model into the claims queue and taken 4 days out of it.
India does not have an unemployment problem.
India has a mediocrity problem.
Every founder I know is always hiring. Always. There is not a single business owner in my circle who is not actively looking for good people right now.
What they are frustrated with is not a lack of candidates. It is mediocre applications. Mediocre interviews. Mediocre work.
The jobs exist. The standards to get them are not being met.
That is a very different problem. And it needs a very different conversation.
I've intellectually known that software engineering was going to go away but it's just started to feel real.
The little dopamine rushes — learning a language, reconfiguring keybindings, upgrading packages or pushing around code on a page to make it easier to read — fade in the rear view mirror, vestiges of a profession no longer needed.
The job is more director than architect or builder, and quickly rising to higher levels of abstraction. Agents may do the work of spewing code into files and servers, but building ambitious real world software is hard in a new way. We are responsible for houses we did not create and whose floors we've never truly walked.
The longer you've been an engineer in the previous world, the harder the transition is now. But it's time to rewire your brain to appreciate the new ways of how things are going to be built.
The ceiling on what we can do is so much higher now.
Anyone that works in AI is working the hardest they've ever worked in their lives. On the surface it's somewhat ironic (AI should give us back time!), but the reality is that it's the most fun, fascinating and empowering epoch in human history. The intelligence revolution.
I talked to a founder who was demoralized because all the ideas he could think of could be easily duplicated. I told him to ignore that worry; nearly all startup ideas are like that at first. Their value is the other ideas they lead to.
"You fail if you build for where the models are now. You fail if you build for where you think the models will be in a year. The only way to build is for where the models will be in 2-3 months."
— @OpenAI's ChatGPT Work product lead @tarstarr
How does the entire timeline get a whole new round of psychosis from basically the same thing every time?
(OpenClaw, Manus, Hermes, Instinct)
It is the same thing, over and over again. If it works how come you're hopping from one to another and not happy with existing one?