At Box, we just surveyed 1,640 IT leaders across the US, Japan, and Europe about agentic AI adoption. Many standout findings, but a big one was that the companies that adopted AI the most are planning to grow headcount the most.
Obviously lots of ways you can read that data and variables mixed in, but it’s actually quite intuitive that the companies that become most productive want to (and are able to) reinvest back into the business to keep getting the gains going.
The narrative of jobs being wiped out assumes that companies will take a fixed approach to what they want to be able for work on. What’s happening in practice is it’s causing companies to want to light up more engineering projects, sell to more customers, automate more processes to give time back, and more. That all leads to more work to be done by people.
AI labs will start price tokens like electricity. Cheap at 2am, expensive at 2pm.
Labs have excess capacity at night and every unsold token is wasted compute, so they'll discount off-peak usage to fill it.
New engineers start on the night shift because that's when tokens are affordable.
Getting promoted to day shift will be the new raise.
Essentially all of my day is meetings now…
I’m either
- meeting with humans about the projects or
- meeting with my agents about the work
In both cases, voice is my input method. The only difference is if I’m listening or reading the outputs.
@trq212@bcherny Not seeing them on 2.1.159. Neither the “workflows” rainbow coloring nor in /effort.
Anything I should try to clear something that is maybe cached to get it to pick up?
@daniel_nguyenx I’m unsure if ChatGPT uses the same architecture as Codex (seems likely). @nicbstme wrote a great article on different memory architectures across model harnesses.
https://t.co/6QqtwnvIDY
"It is in some ways offensive to me that iOS is a nearly 20-year-old computer on which you cannot make software for the computer itself." — @gruber
"At this point, an iPad Pro costs like $2,000. And you can't use it to make apps. It's kind of bizarre."
"Even if it was just like, 10 people — a consumer-level of TestFlight distribution — where you can make apps for your friends and family and distribute it on up to 10 devices. And it doesn't go through Apple, doesn't need approval, you just make it and distribute it."
"Yes, it's disruptive to Apple's business. But the disruption is inevitable anyway. So why not go with what's cool, and do the coolest thing possible, that makes new possibilities available to your users and developers on your platform?"
Love this and it is an important read.
One thing I’d add to this is that our continual formation as humans is important.
Fernando says it really plainly here, that adding scaffolding to a human doesn’t change them… and change/formation is how we grow as humans.
CEOs are uniquely prone to AI psychosis because they’re sufficiently distant from the last mile of work that still has to happen to generate most value with AI.
So when they play with AI, they see the happy path results, often not considering the next 10 or 20 things that have to happen to get sustainable results from agents.
“Look I made this awesome product prototype”. Yes but you didn’t have to review the code before it went into production and fix a bunch of issues.
“Look I generated a contract”. Yes but you didn’t verify all the terms before it goes out to the counterparty and didn’t have to wire up all the past contracts to work with.
The best thing you can do as a CEO is to use AI a *ton* to figure out the real implications of agents in the enterprise, and come out the other side with an appreciation for both the upside and the real work that goes into them.