I'm not sure how it would show up in quarterly results.
Is it like the stereotypical dad who rents a power washer, powerwashes every exposed surface on his property, and then doesn't need to do any powerwashing for a few years; his neighbor who gets an Instant Pot and uses it for every meal for a month, then sees it gathering dust when the family gets tired of pressure-cooked stews; or like their neighbor who gets a microwave oven and uses it multiple times a day for decades?
I guess only time will tell.
A few mundane things got automated, but these were just back office admin type work. Nothing that's going to show on the P&L. Yeah those people now have a little more time for other things, but those other things are also not revenue generating. No FTE got replaced by it so in the end they just paid for a bunch of administrative positions to be a little less busy. Great for the workers who are now less stressed, but almost no impact on the business financials except there's now yet another subscription.
Your employer is doing it wrong. You need usage surveillance with sanctions for low/declining use, then people won't stop using it.
If there's anything I've learned as a software engineer, it's that agreeing with and defending the ideas of business leaders and Silicon Valley VC influencers proves I'm very intelligent.
when I quote this comment later, with appropriate attribution, please know that I will be shaking my head and frowning while doing so
That’s the explanation how you can have both the anecdotes of amazing AI productivity and rigorous studies showing anything from actual loss of productivity to single-digit gains.
It's like building a super tall Jenga tower very quickly but laying the bricks much worse than a careful player.
The code AI produces is not created equally, not even close.
When you try to replace your entire brain with AI things are going to go wrong.
For the product my friend works on, it's definitely the latter. I definitely don't expect this party to last forever.
> I'm not sure how it would show up in quarterly results.
Ultimately they make money selling rides, not selling software. The Uber app is mature and adding new features is unlikely to significantly increase sales.
Writing 2x more code doesn't translate to 2x more revenue unless it results in 2x more rides.
It would if it meant they then fired half their software engineers, which is the ultimate goal.
Standard answer is "companies that are not seeing significant gains from AI just aren't AI-ing hard enough, trust me bro".