Comment by lor_louis
1 day ago
A couple of months back my boss asked me why I didn't use AI all that much. I told him that I didn't think it made me more productive in the tasks at was doing at the time (having to wrangle undocumented really custom legacy infra stuff).
He told me he found AI to make him really productive and said something along the lines of: "It's really good at summarizing long reports and it saves me time when I have to write end of quarter status updates".
I'm convinced about 50% of management decisions come from Claude now.
50% I think is kind of low, but it will be definitely higher. These people are not deep thinkers in the first place - and they will succumb to cognitive surrender pretty quickly.
Cognitive surrender is an amazing term.
This is from: https://www.nytimes.com/2026/03/29/opinion/ai-claude-chatgpt...
Agree, indeed a great term. I will adopt it in discussions with AI boosters.
Yep. We made the largest single loss ever last financial year and the previous "our year ahead" presentation was literally ChatGPT dross that didn't many any sense. There was a percentage fucking pie chart that didn't add up to 100%
> and it saves me time when I have to write end of quarter status updates".
You boss is a fucking moron. How is that shit even legal, especially in publicly traded companies I wonder? It makes me livid - people invest their pension funds into these companies which are managed by shitty slot machines now?
Not to mention that there is a reason why long reports are long - they contain details that will invariably be skipped by the LLM-ShitGenerators. But I guess it makes them "productive".
One other thing I noticed - the AI idiots are always the ones to volunteer their "experience" and say how they find it super helpful. Not once have I heard them say they find it useful, and that is after they first hear you say it's not helpful and explain in detail why. Dunning-Kruger or not, but they must think they are smarter and seeing something we are not seeing, for some reason.