I saw this study, too, and while it's helpful to know this, I feel like AI could be 2-3x slower than if we were to do it manually and I'd still use it, because I'll never be able to be faster than AI if it's working for me while I'm going for a walk, making a coffee or food, helping people in Slack, responding to emails, drafting docs, etc. I can always have AI working in the background while I'm doing something else, so it's still higher output in total.
Still, when using AI, you need to recognize when it's just plain stuck and needs a different approach or needs you to jump in and do it yourself.
I appreciate that perspective, Jordan, and I absolutely agree! One of my favorite things to do these days is kick off a long generation before joining a meeting and then come back to review the results. Even if they aren't any good and I have to throw away the changes, it didn't cost me any time to produce them.
I find that most of my time sinks are due to trying to prompt my way through a solution without giving the necessary context (or understanding it myself), or getting distracted during a long generation. Neither of these is a problem with the tool, of course. The problem is, as usual, between the keyboard and the chair 😆
I enjoyed reviewing this study because it steers the conversation away from the hype of 10x productivity and makes us think about the ways AI tooling could be slowing us down.
Bringing a balanced perspective was exactly my intention, so I'm happy to hear that's how it's coming through! I appreciate you reading the article 🙏
I saw this study, too, and while it's helpful to know this, I feel like AI could be 2-3x slower than if we were to do it manually and I'd still use it, because I'll never be able to be faster than AI if it's working for me while I'm going for a walk, making a coffee or food, helping people in Slack, responding to emails, drafting docs, etc. I can always have AI working in the background while I'm doing something else, so it's still higher output in total.
Still, when using AI, you need to recognize when it's just plain stuck and needs a different approach or needs you to jump in and do it yourself.
I appreciate that perspective, Jordan, and I absolutely agree! One of my favorite things to do these days is kick off a long generation before joining a meeting and then come back to review the results. Even if they aren't any good and I have to throw away the changes, it didn't cost me any time to produce them.
I find that most of my time sinks are due to trying to prompt my way through a solution without giving the necessary context (or understanding it myself), or getting distracted during a long generation. Neither of these is a problem with the tool, of course. The problem is, as usual, between the keyboard and the chair 😆
This was such an eye-opening read. I appreciate the balanced perspective, Maxi.
It’s a good reminder that the tools are only as helpful as the way we use them.
Slowing down to notice where AI adds value (and where it doesn’t) feels more important than ever.
Thank you for putting this together with so much clarity🙏💡
Thank you for the thoughtful comment, Doina!
I enjoyed reviewing this study because it steers the conversation away from the hype of 10x productivity and makes us think about the ways AI tooling could be slowing us down.
Bringing a balanced perspective was exactly my intention, so I'm happy to hear that's how it's coming through! I appreciate you reading the article 🙏