Another highlight from the actual report is a massive increase in attempts to build AI in-house rather than buy, which highlights existing systems' inability to generate value. We can't find any use case for Clippy 2.0 as part of our existing software but, but the investors (and my bosses) might get spooked if we don't sound like we're on the cutting edge of this tech that everyone says is revolutionary. In the context of 70-90% of software projects failing in whole or in part I can only expect this to go well.
this post was submitted on 03 Dec 2024
20 points (100.0% liked)
TechTakes
42 readers
12 users here now
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
I've also been involved with projects that were retro-activly renamed to AI. Implemented a new oldskool search algorithm? That's AI now! Simple decision tree with static weights? AI!
Nobody wants investors or customers to think you're doing a bad job not putting AI in stuff, even if it doesn't really help or isn't a use case for anything related to AI.
To be fair, simple decision trees with static weights used to be AI. Look, I learned how to do A* search from an AI textbook. AI is just algorithms with delusions.