> After Claude Code (AC), the economics that gave us every single piece of software we use today have inverted. Building software has become cheap, with the marginal cost of building a new feature approaching zero, while running it, now that AI sits in the critical path, has become expensive.
This is such a weird take, if I need some piece of software why would an ongoing operating cost be having an AI sitting in the critical path.
If the argument is that making software has become cheap because you can use AI to generate software, it doesn't seem to follow that you would build all software as some sort of shell around AI. If I ask claude to build me a task tracking app, I imagine it would build me something with some bog standard data storage and not decide that it needs to keep the tasks in an LLM.
I don't agree with most of this post, but this part stood out as supremely odd. There is a lot of software that isn't made any better by having AI jammed into it as an always on piece of the operating puzzle.
This is such a weird take, if I need some piece of software why would an ongoing operating cost be having an AI sitting in the critical path.
If the argument is that making software has become cheap because you can use AI to generate software, it doesn't seem to follow that you would build all software as some sort of shell around AI. If I ask claude to build me a task tracking app, I imagine it would build me something with some bog standard data storage and not decide that it needs to keep the tasks in an LLM.
I don't agree with most of this post, but this part stood out as supremely odd. There is a lot of software that isn't made any better by having AI jammed into it as an always on piece of the operating puzzle.