people are rushing too quickly into hyped technology not understanding how to best use the tech. We’ve seen this throughout history with naive database implementations in the 1980s, the dot-com bust of the late ’90s, and the mobile web of the early 2000s. Whenever there is hype, we shuffled into the easy path, forcing the tech into the product without understanding its weaknesses. We are more worried about being left behind than actually doing something of value. We get there eventually, but only after understanding that we were asking the wrong questions. So many companies fail figuring this out.
Gunpowder’s explosive force relies on combustion, effectively a very fast form of burning, which makes it easy to detonate with a lit fuse. But nitroglycerin does not burn. Its power derives from supersonic shock waves generated by atoms of oxygen, nitrogen, and carbon rearranging themselves to form more stable bonds after a physical disturbance.
starting with business-level impact in mind doesn’t mean you are putting your customers last. It means that you are putting the commercial relationship between your business and your customers front and center, and letting that relationship guide how you learn about and build solutions for your customers.
I saw more clearly that we’re entering a dizzying age of duality in AI. Is AI going to kill our jobs or create more jobs? Yes. Did I technically build a feature in an app that has since been pushed to a hundred million users, or did I cheat my way through an assignment by leaning heavily on AI and other humans? Yes. Do I need deep foundational knowledge of software programming to be a successful coder, or can I skate by without even knowing the name of the programming language I’m using? Also yes.
Low-impact work creates more complicated products which, in turn, lead to more dependencies and conflicts to manage. Those dependencies and conflicts discourage teams from taking on work that touches on the product’s commercial core. Which, in turn, encourages more low-impact work.