It's certainly an open question whether the providers can recoup the investments being made with growth alone, but it's not out of the question.

Starting?

This is VCs FOMOing as global-economy-threatening levels of leverage are being bet on an AI transformation that, by even the most optimistic estimates, cannot achieve a tiny portion of the required ROI in the required time.

It's not like this isn't following exactly the same hype cycle as every other technological transformation.

It's just work, there's no secrets to it.

You can build faster now that you ever have: I am building faster than I have in 25 years of engineering. You have more capable support for all the unfamiliar processes of building a business imaginable.

And almost everyone larger than you is finding it harder to achieve similar productivity gains from implementing AI, if not outright struggling with it. This is a golden moment and won't last long.

'Git gud' isn't much of a truism.

You could also be asking for too much in one go, though that's becoming less and less of a problem as LLMs improve.

All the LLM hate here isn't observation, it's sour grapes. Complaining about slop and poor code quality outputs is confessing that you haven't taken the time to understand what is reasonable to ask for, aren't educating your junior engineers how to interact with LLMs.

Those days are gone. Coding is cheap. The same LLMs that enable people to submit 9000 line PRs of chaos can be used to quickly turn them into more sensible work. If they genuinely can't do a better job, rejecting the PR is still the right response. Just push back.