Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The anatomy of an AI-native org

ajeygore.in

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 43 posts

Re: The anatomy of an AI-native org

#21

Post by wood_spirit »

Ifkaluva wrote: post #12

I think this post will age poorly. Middle managers were not “waste”, they served a social function of creating stability and managing workloads. I think the proposed “new model” probably doesn’t scale. Also probably a single human can’t comfortably do that many things. We don’t build orgs to maximally squeeze every drop of productivity and leave behind an empty human husk. Orgs have grown as a negotiated balance betw…

Middle managers were about making work legible https://www.seangoedecke.com/seeing-like-a-software-company/

Now that wasn’t the most efficient and it has a whole bunch of perverse incentives too, but it’s what happened as companies got big enough to hire people to do the work that could be delegated because those delegatees got status from having people to themselves delegate to.

Re: The anatomy of an AI-native org

#24

Post by zug_zug »

I dunno, feels a bit pat to me, a bit business-school. I think the how/what/why distinction sounds fun "Look! 3 roles at the company may align with 3 question words!" but doesn't seem to really hold water the more I think about it.

I don't think an executive's job is why, it's strategy (what in the long term).

I also think what/how questions are inextricably interlinked -- what we should build depends on whether or not we can build/maintain it cheaply enough.

Here's where I do agree -- I do think the AI era changes how companies work, it does make them smaller, that reduction in size reduces the amount of filler roles (project managers), and this will be a great benefit to the bottom line. Though ideally this means more competition so that benefit goes to the consumer too.

Re: The anatomy of an AI-native org

#28

Post by pydry »

mike_hock wrote: post #16
pydry wrote: post #6

Im starting to think that these days the easiest way to detect frontier model influencer content designed to push a stock boosting narrative and real content is the simple presence of one word: "slop". It matches my other experiences with the PR industry - they'd often have blanket bans on the usage of certain phrases, terms or references to "uncomfortable" events. I'm pretty sure this goes for bots on social media t…

That goes for superliminal influencers, but I'm pretty sure the campaign as a whole is smart enough to play different roles including pretending to be people "on the other side."

it was actually seeing content from "the other side" this morning that made me think the rule holds across all content.

the content in question was some "dev" whining about good AI was and how despondent it made them feel because they felt that their job was now pointless. They took weirdly circuitous routes to avoid saying the word outright.

meanwhile actual devs start complaining about slop within about 4 seconds.

Re: The anatomy of an AI-native org

#30

Post by dofm »

> A founder writing prompts that drive an agent’s product roadmap is hands-on.

I mean, I guess. But I thought the romantic ideal and sometimes, some rare times actually the real lived experience was that what made these people founders was their ideas, their drive, their focus, belief in an idea, their ability to make space for people to take part in their plan etc.

If that is getting delegated to Claude, it kind of sounds like they shouldn’t really be expecting the big bucks.

If it’s just going to be some wealthy kid with an idea they had in the shower and Claude, why would anyone want to be part of that?

Every part of this article makes me fear for our souls, like, sure, you’re a great developer but understand that your manager who is already not listening to your concerns has got Codex on his side telling him he’s got rare insight.

Post reply on HN