upvote
>I don't really understand this dooming.

no one remembers the last time things got better rather than worse. shitcoin-driven scarcity seamlessly transitioned into COVID-driven scarcity and now into hyperscaler-driven scarcity. the chipmakers' cabal decided to meet increased demand with four digit margins rather than expanding production.

reply
Some of us do. In 2011 Thailand floods that destroyed major HDD manufacturing capacity and drives were really expensive.

It's Deja vu for NVMe and SSD drives this time as prices are way up there.

reply
I had to buy a replacement HDD recently. They’re also stupid expensive.
reply
I don't remember any previous price increase this significant or sustained. Relevant to this thread, I don't ever remember major computer companies like Apple having to significantly jack up their prices because hardware costs had gone up so significantly and stayed there.
reply
reply
Aside: I used to love reading qz. Anyone remember when it was a chat/imessage style mobile app? The news was super short and quirky.

Then they sold out and most recently literally sold out to this software company from my neck of the woods. Every single article now feels like it's written by an LLM optimized to write like a crypto/AI bro.

I used to use it daily and now not at all.

reply
> AI isn't adding much productivity

Would love to know where this comes from. I am not sure about that. Could you point to data/anecdata?

reply
https://fortune.com/2026/08/22/executives-ai-productivity-la...

There's been a few studies. Most find productivity gain from 'AI' to be negligible.

reply
Seems hard to believe, I mean I'm not an AI absolutist but as a programmer it allows me to automate simple things like writing small patches or config changes in a matter of minutes where before I would have invested hours, so hard to believe that it won't at least bump productivity up by 20-60 % overall, it's also tremendously better at finding relevant content and curating it than me so that's another time saver unrelated to programming but relevant for any type of knowledge work. Friends in research and medecine and law also tell me that AI has drastically accelerated their rate of processing and ingesting any type of information and helped them to automate aspects of their jobs. So not sure but negligible isn't the word I would use here.
reply
> Seems hard to believe […]

This goes back before AI, with computers not being found to be improving productivity numbers: Solow's paradox.

* https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Productivity_paradox

* https://www.brookings.edu/articles/the-solow-productivity-pa...

reply
> it allows me to automate simple things like writing small patches or config changes in a matter of minutes where before I would have invested hours

One of the problems here is that things like this only count as "increased productivity" in the economic sense if it results in more income at the end of the funnel. Are you actually making more product faster in all your new-found free time?

Very few orgs I've worked in have actually been limited by the speed of programmers writing code. Usually it's communication overhead and management processes eating up most of the bandwidth - and those tend to expand to absorb any additional bandwidth.

reply
Yup. And in my experience, AI has made the communication and decision making overhead significantly worse thanks to 100x longer docs, code that noone understands and enormous pressure by executives to magically produce software that just works.
reply
That's just because most people are bad at communication to start with.

Look at all the shit github README before llm. Most repos didn't bother because it was effort. those few that did, were because of autistic focus. Of those, very few were "great" user documentation.

now llms are here, the effort barrier is gone, and now we're inundated with shit README that provide no value to users nor respect their time.

Once you start applying SKILL.md that revolve around fixing HOW to communicate value to users in a way that respects their time, you'll see this story change in noticeable places.

I doubt it will change everywhere because it also requires that you give a shit about doing this in the first place, so those people Ed Zitron talks about... business idiots won't care, because they're ultimately nihlist.

reply
> One of the problems here is that things like this only count as "increased productivity" in the economic sense if it results in more income at the end of the funnel. Are you actually making more product faster in all your new-found free time?

This strikes me as a problem with how we define productivity in this context. If I can do my job in 1 hour, when it took me 8 before, am I not more productive in a rate-based sense? Sure, I might only work 5 hours in a week instead of 40, so my net production is the same, but my rate of productivity was certainly much higher.

reply
Wealth created is still the same, and that's what an economist means by "productive" - you produced X amount of wealth (usually measured in dollar amounts).

It's like "work" meaning one thing to a normal person, but something very specific and counterintuitive in Newtonian physics (if you carry a fifty-pound weight in a circle and stop at your starting point, you've done no work).

reply
I mean I can deliver the same software in one month that I delivered in maybe 3 months before and for many things I don't need a dedicated frontend developer, designer or writer anymore. So for me it's the case!
reply
Even if it was true… does anyone really believe that companies will stop using AI?
reply
Ask any solo founder and they will have a very different story

https://www.economist.com/business/2026/07/27/america-has-be...

reply