That tracks. CEOs are locked in a state of needing to justify their own existence. Being the one in charge of migrating to AI is the perfect reason. CEOs live and die by quarterly performance, but don’t have to answer to long term issues; janky code that resembles a demo is good enough to last until the CEO can laterally jump to the next ship.
TechTakes
Big brain tech dude got yet another clueless take over at HackerNews etc? Here's the place to vent. Orange site, VC foolishness, all welcome.
This is not debate club. Unless it’s amusing debate.
For actually-good tech, you want our NotAwfulTech community
@swlabr heh, that's a bit too much of generalisation for my personal taste. How many CEOs did you speak to in the last 5 years to make you so confident about their "state"?
Here's one about "jumping ships":
"world’s best-performing CEOs demonstrate remarkable longevity. They’ve held their jobs for an average of 15 years, more than twice the average tenure of an S&P 500 CEO"
https://hbr.org/2019/11/the-truth-about-ceo-tenure
How many CEOs did you speak to in the last 5 years to make you so confident about their “state”
Probably just short of 70, definitely more than 68.
Here’s one about “jumping ships”
- That “article” doesn’t say shit about fuck.
- Your point in no way conflicts with what I said.
- What are you even doing here? How does boot taste?
@swlabr
What's with this fascist language:
"What are you even doing here? How does boot taste?"
I'm gonna leave you to your own hate.