It feels like Im in a different world than this author. Cluade code is now more reliable and trustworthy than most of my coworkers but this author hasnt seen a single AI initiative succeed? Seems like theyre just being obtuse because the only other explanation I can think of is user error.
I think there's a huge difference between someone using AI to help them build something, and a large organisation attempting to become "AI Native", whatever that means.
We saw the same during the dot com boom - lots of companies trying to become "dot coms" because that did good things to their share price and they could answer investor questions, but no-one actually in the org knew wtf they were supposed to do to make the company an actual dot com. Trying to define what a "dot com" actually was, was difficult enough. Then the bubble collapsed and investor pressure on change relaxed, and a quarter of a century later we're pretty relaxed that some companies exist almost solely on the internet, and others don't. Both for reasons that mostly make sense.
It'll be the same with AI - the bubble will collapse, the pressure will relax, and we'll go on to have some companies almost entirely built out of AI, and others not.
But the poor management folks who have to come up with some answer about how to make their organisation "AI native" immediately - you could not pay me enough to do that job.