Hacker News Reader

Comment by glimshe | Hacker News Reader

Being a Chief Technology Officer is no longer the job. We now need an end-to-end AI orchestrator for the corporation in the Chief Agentic Officer role. Dana Lawson is now obsolete and must be let go.

View on HN

It sure is convenient AI isn't capable of doing the c-suite's job

The brutal reality being its probably most capable in that domain. They'll freely admit they're not "the never the smartest guy in the room" and their decision record proves it

The higher up the ladder, the more incompetent they become IMO.

If you're in the seat, no one will force you out. They'll leave, but they can't make you leave.

Can you clarify the point you’re trying to make? C-level people are forced out all the time. Even the CEO reports to the board.

That just means the board is in the seat.

> If you're in the seat

Like if you own 51% of the company?

Human C-suites will continue to keep their jobs as long as other humans in similar positions continue to buy into their airy-fairy "strategy" stuff. ;)

The enormous question here is if AI works the way these people say then surely competing companies will emerge that are enormously smaller and more agile, thus eating their lunch completely.

The fact this doesn't appear to be happening suggests something different is in play.

Token generation speed is too slow for that to happen. One can’t easily replicate an enterprise.

Use more than one single account?

Not everything can easily be run in parallel. But I do have more than one account.

One difference is, when the business hits a tough patch, the bank starts asking questions, and whether or not the bank lets it all continue depends primarily on whether there’s a CEO/CFO who:

- Has history with the bank (trust)

- Is willing to put their neck on the line

AI in the current form has no ability to put its neck on the line.

They're only called CTO if they're from CTO region of France.

Otherwise it's just sparkling AI-Cheerleader.

If a CTO said something in the woods, and no one re-posted it, are they still a CTO or just a crazy person screaming in the woods? By amplifying his message you are justifying his job, position, and standing.

This got me thinking on a new way to improve the news: Instead of reporting on the empty words people say, only report on what they have done, example:

a) Elon Musks says SpaceX is the best thing ever worth the most money ever because he is greatest person ever.

as opposed to:

b) SpaceX, run by Elon Musk, is currently Making $X per quarter, they do this by ......

the first engineer that creates a public company all by themselves will prove / get it all

But what do you think about her opinion? Is writing code still a job of developers going forward? and why?

I actually think almost everything she’s describing is basically writing code. I remember Mitchell Hashimoto wrote this blog post saying he wished people didn’t take “infrastructure as code” literally. That “infrastructure as code” really meant something more like “infrastructure as documented specification”

In the agile spirit of “working software over comprehensive documentation” I do think the future of software engineering is writing code. Speaking through code is not a philosophy that’s going away any time soon imo. If anything, code is that much more important than it was before.

Wow, you got agitated. Writing code was never a job. Software engineering is a job where part of the responsibility is to create code. “Writing code” in itself means nothing.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com