Comment by ramesh31
2 days ago
Instead of asking how can we ship more code or how can we ship better code, why not "how can AI give me a better life"? Machines are supposed to make our lives easier. If I can output the same quality at a faster rate of speed, why can't I have that time back to my own life now? This is how my view on agentic coding is evolving toward. I don't want to be under the pressure of doubling my productivity for an employer. I want to capture that gain for myself.
> If I can output the same quality at a faster rate of speed, why can't I have that time back to my own life now?
We have done a terrible job at allocating the net benefits of globalization. We will (continue to) do a terrible job at allocating the net benefits of productivity improvements.
The "why" is hard to answer. But one thing is clear: the United States has a dominant economic ideology, and the name of that ideology is not hardworker-ism.
You need to own parts of the company you work at for that to happen.
> I don't want to be under the pressure of doubling my productivity for an employer. I want to capture that gain for myself.
Unfortunately this will never happen. I don't think it has ever happened in the history of capital
When a machine can double your productivity, capital buys the machine for you and fires one of your coworkers
Or the machine makes it so less skilled people can do the same work you do. But since they're less skilled, they command less pay. So capital pays them less, and devalues your work
Already seeing this with AI. My employer is demanding all engineers start using LLM tools, citing that it is "an easy 20% boost". Not sure where they got the number but whatever.
But is everyone going to get a 20% raise? No. Not a chance. Capital will always try to capture 100% of any productivity gains for themselves
>"how can AI give me a better life"?
that's an easy one: by destroying itself, and taking social media and smartphones with it