News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Building for the Future by prymitive on Thursday May 07, 2026 @04:55PM (#48054837)
It’s not like this is a factory floor where you process something coming in and AI suddenly makes the process more efficient and people are idle. Every team in tech world has infinite backlog, you don’t fire 20% the minute someone manages to close a few tickets.
Re:Building for the Future by Marsymars on Thursday May 07, 2026 @06:57PM (#48056195)
> Every team in tech world has infinite backlog

I have non-tech friends who struggle to understand this, because they literally clear their entire backlog of work every single day they're at work.

Re:Building for the Future by swyx on Friday May 08, 2026 @04:37AM (#48060352)
then they basically don't do knowledge work
Re:Building for the Future by Marsymars on Friday May 08, 2026 @11:53AM (#48064880)
Some of them yeah, they do jobs involving physical work, but some of them are office works — their jobs/companies are just set up so that they've got a defined set of tasks/responsibilities, and they're able to complete them all every day. (Or some/most days.)

They find the idea of an infinite task queue horrifying.

Re:Building for the Future by benmusch on Thursday May 07, 2026 @04:59PM (#48054905)
why not? isn't the implication of your point that companies should just hire infinitely so long as there's work to be done?
Re:Building for the Future by ok_dad on Thursday May 07, 2026 @05:06PM (#48055024)
Companies never want to reduce productivity unless they need to cut spending or increase profits. In other words, if AI increases productivity that’s a direct win they can use to beat their competitors. You can’t spend money you don’t have, but you want to spend the money you do have as point at there work to do, which there always is.
Re:Building for the Future by benmusch on Thursday May 07, 2026 @05:16PM (#48055174)
> unless they need to cut spending or increase profits

yes, so basically always? the situations where companies don't want to do this are very rare.

I understand your broader point that doubling down on productive things is useful. But there's no limiting principle to that idea.

The obvious reality is that businesses are trying to find a sweet spot between expenses and productivity. It's not always the case that slashing spending is worth it. But it's equally naive to act like being able to do more with less shouldn't make you want... less