Just want to clarify, this is not my Substack, I’m just sharing this because I found it insightful.

The author describes himself as a “fractional CTO”(no clue what that means, don’t ask me) and advisor. His clients asked him how they could leverage AI. He decided to experience it for himself. From the author(emphasis mine):

I forced myself to use Claude Code exclusively to build a product. Three months. Not a single line of code written by me. I wanted to experience what my clients were considering—100% AI adoption. I needed to know firsthand why that 95% failure rate exists.

I got the product launched. It worked. I was proud of what I’d created. Then came the moment that validated every concern in that MIT study: I needed to make a small change and realized I wasn’t confident I could do it. My own product, built under my direction, and I’d lost confidence in my ability to modify it.

Now when clients ask me about AI adoption, I can tell them exactly what 100% looks like: it looks like failure. Not immediate failure—that’s the trap. Initial metrics look great. You ship faster. You feel productive. Then three months later, you realize nobody actually understands what you’ve built.

  • MangoCats@feddit.it
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    5 hours ago

    people re-inventing the wheel because it’s “easier” than searching without properly understand the cost of the entire process.

    A good LLM will do a web search first and copy its answer from there…

    • MalMen@masto.pt
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      5 hours ago

      @MangoCats @utopiah exactly this… i did some small stuff out lf pastoring llms, but first searched for what I need, usually I find a small repo that kind of do what I want, then I clone it, change it a but using help of llm and if i think it is usefull I open a PR and let the mantainer decide if its good or not