> The issue isn't AI, it's effort asymmetry
Effort asymmetry is inheret to AI's raison d'être. (One could argue that's true for most consumer-facing technology.)
The problem is AI.
> The issue isn't AI, it's effort asymmetry
Effort asymmetry is inheret to AI's raison d'être. (One could argue that's true for most consumer-facing technology.)
The problem is AI.
I’ve been thinking about this idea a lot. I have a phrase that I’ve taken to using. Leverage Engineering.
I think AI is going to create a whole new class of people that take a tiny output and turn it into an outsized output.
When this works, it is really nice. Think Cursor, Lovable, or OpenClaw.
When it doesn’t work though, things get ugly too. The same power that allows a small team to build a billion dollar company also allows rouge agents to industrialize their efforts as well.
Combine this with the rise of headless browsers and you have a dangerous cocktail.
I wouldn’t be surprised if we see regulation or licensing around frontier AI APIs in the near future.
> I think AI is going to create a whole new class of people that take a tiny output and turn it into an outsized output.
and thats a problem because? you know people said very similar things about digital music and synthesizers.... "anyone can make music with a synthesizer, so it will make music less special", but were still waiting for music to decay away because its easier than it used to be.
To be fair, I didn’t see parent criticizing it. Just observing.
> When this works, it is really nice. Think Cursor, Lovable, or OpenClaw.
> When it doesn’t work though, things get ugly too.
wat dis den?
No I don’t think it’s a bad thing!
I’m just predicting what will happen. I think it’s a really good thing.
The issue is not AI. It's our incentives that make having contributions to a well known open source project a currency for getting a job.