The author gives this example of the problem and incorrect way to leverage AI:

"Sarah was relieved. She thought she could focus on high-value synthesis work. She’d take the agent’s output and refine it, add strategic insights, make it client-ready."

Then they propose a long winded solution which is essentially the same exact thing but uses the magical term "orchestrate" a few times to make it sound different.

God damn it. Can people write interesting articles in NORMAL writing style nowadays? Why is everyone writing in these stupid short "punchline" sentences?

> You saw a colleague generate something 80% as good in four minutes using an AI agent. Maybe 90% as good if you’re being honest.

Wish this were realistic - I'd have enjoyed the read more.

The only way to win is to already have enough money that you don't need a job.

Or get a physical job AI can't do. But all of those are commodities and pay shit wages.

We're in a recession, it's the economy that's shrinking, not my job.

Work that can largely accelerate AI seems pointless to me in the current situation. It’s fairly clear to me that this will soon lead to an oversupply of workers and a drop in wages. It’s possible that wages may even fall to such a level that pursuing those professions will no longer make sense at all. Unfortunately it seems like software engineering will be one of those professions.

AI slop, obviously.

The fundamental problem is not unlike what happened in the industrial revolution: we are suddenly much more productive as a society, how do we distribute that productivity?

A sane society would use a tool like the monetary supply to do so: money is a public good (it exists because we say it does) and thus should be managed for the public good. People should be able to work less while having a higher living standard, which is easily achievable given our almost comical productivity.

Because we've privatized money creation in the form of credit monopolies, this obvious mechanism isn't available, so it seems like we will end up with either short term crushing poverty followed by bloody revolution or the techno-feudalist utopia-for-the-few.

> Last week, you spent three hours writing a campaign brief. You saw a colleague generate something 80% as good in four minutes using an AI agent. Maybe 90% as good if you’re being honest.

No it's like 60% as good, but management and other "AI for brains" people can't see it.

I need to stop using the metric of "if a hacker news post has a lot of comments, then the article is worth a read" and instead read the comments first.

Lately, there have many controversial articles (with a lot of comments) that are most likely written by AI and I regret wasting my time on. Sigh, is there a hacker news replacement with higher quality articles that I don't know about? I imagine all platforms are inundated with slop now.

This belongs on reddit. Not HN.

The key "One critical caveat: this won’t work forever in its current form. Eventually, agents will get better at orchestration too. But it buys you three to five years. And in that time, you’ll see the next evolution coming"

The suggestion does sound a bit like 'work faster'.

Don't just work faster, but yes, work faster.

I tried to take the headline seriously, but reading deeper into the piece they just do a semantic trick - the current job is "shrinking" and you need to find a new better job to do instead. This is basically what disappearing would imply anyway?

Also very funny to use an AI to write this kind of article. I w wonder how they feel about their job writing blog posts shrinking.

AI-written article, as a heads up.

My job as a software engineer is not going anywhere. It’s only getting more interesting. Nice vibe blog / fear mongering piece.

AI slop describing how AI slop is affecting your job. Cool.

The advice is: identify human constraints and remove them with agents.

Yet another simple stupid idea inflated to a massive article with ai.