The success of this product is as strongly correlated to the decline of the size of this market. No matter how you slice it, there's no way to grow the revenue of AI coding tools, and also continue to train and improve better models and create better AI tools for engineers.

As the tech industry contracts to greater and greater amounts of code being written by fewer and fewer engineers "multiplied" by AI, we're actually effectively polluting the datasets of potentially better future models by training them on accelerating echo-chambers.

AI coding tools always need *more* code—and more importantly more *new* code—written by humans outside the current scope of the AI's training models in order to improve. Some improvements can be made by training the same data better, but ultimately what you need is more and more new data to evolve.

The more engineers you can lay off, the more valuable the AI is to you, because you can pay for code from AI less than you pay for code from humans.

The more engineers you lay off, the fewer engineers you have to lay off. The less valuable AI is to you.

AI coding tools eat their own markets.

I never did have any money and I didn't pay for it either if I did have to go hello it's not a point of privilege I was poor and broke geez Louise f the insurance companies also ideologically I can't sustain their business model and I don't intend to. That's on you if you want to but I'm 🚫

A small ray of sunshine today.

Good. @mark-carney.bsky.social, all government officials and departments can start by closing X and Meta accounts.