Top
Best
New

Posted by jampa 4 days ago

Product and design are the new bottlenecks(www.jampa.dev)
56 points | 66 commentspage 2
zahlman 9 hours ago|
> Okay, so what are product engineers? They are software engineers empowered to handle some responsibilities of PMs and Designers, balancing the roles.

> Product engineers assume traditional PM roles, including owning the roadmap, engaging with users, analyzing data, framing opportunities, and determining what to build. However, they do not replace a PM. The PM still provides context but is no longer the main driver of implementation.

How is this different from a "lead"?

xnx 11 hours ago||
Old idea: 1-2 pizza teams (Bezos, 2002)

New idea: 1-2 pizza companies

thenoblesunfish 11 hours ago||
From my team's PoV, I reject the premise. The non-eng people can scale their ambitions and asks even faster than AI has accelerated the engineers' work. In fact, they always have a bunch of stuff that ends up below the line, they always would have wanted to go bigger and faster.
dauertewigkeit 11 hours ago||
Nothing worse than being famished and getting one measly slice of pizza.
pooper 11 hours ago||
> Nothing worse than being famished and getting one measly slice of pizza.

I am not exactly a big guy but even I can easily eat two slices of pizza and I am talking about real slices of the Costco pizza which I love for its value for money. I can't imagine how you could feed a team of eight with a single pizza.

jollyllama 11 hours ago|||
Times are hard. Put up with less pizza or you're off the team.
LanceH 11 hours ago||
One slice of vegetarian pizza.
gz5 12 hours ago||
>The Theory of Constraints states that every system has a bottleneck, since without one, it would operate infinitely fast, which is impossible.

If we believe the AI-influenced system will be faster, more prolific and more experimental (cheaper experiments), then it seems human attention and the rate at which humans can change (individually, processes, tools, teams, etc) becomes the bottleneck.

In that system, the designer and PM functions become more important in addressing that bottleneck - in producing solutions to best overcome those bottlenecks?

pixl97 11 hours ago||
Are we assuming the systems the AI is building are systems for humans?

Continuous learning systems aren't there yet, though we have the proto-learning systems with things like agents and skills. What does it look like when we have AI systems building systems for other AI systems?

gz5 11 hours ago||
good point although built for humans > built for AIs is likely true for a while
AlienRobot 11 hours ago||
Is that quote really true? I've always understood "bottleneck" as the slowest part of a system, so a system without a bottleneck simply has all parts being equally fast, it isn't necessarily infinitely fast.
gz5 8 hours ago||
the quoted text above is from the OP's article - your point is interesting though
moezd 12 hours ago||
I know one team, consists of me only :)
thrill 9 hours ago||
“My post assumes that AI won't improve much beyond its current state, which seems like a safe prediction.”

Say what?

9rx 8 hours ago|
There is still some room for improvement where trying to introduce LLMs into chaotic codebases and whatnot. LLMs continue to struggle there. Although so do humans, to be fair. Chaos is plain hard. However, in a lot of cases AI is already as good as it can get. "Won't improve much" is a fair take.

Technology has plenty of room to keep marching forward, but the next substantive improvement here will see it no longer be AI. It will become AGI.

_alternator_ 11 hours ago||
I read the whole thing somewhat critically, but at the end it became clear that the core issue I had with this post were explained in a caveat at the end: the author assumes that AI capabilities won’t improve much beyond the current state of the art.

If you replace this assumption with “we’re going to see the same magnitude improvement in the next six months that we saw in the last six months” then the post is already outdated. You can’t hire new people fast enough to effectuate this strategy before you’ll have to change course.

Instead, I’d propose allowing a bit more anarchy in your teams, letting people know that it’s OK to take the initiative, even if it means stepping on each others toes. Management should be clear that critical risks need to be mitigated (eg no security vulns, no prod outages) and be strict about those (to the point where you can say ‘yolo pushing a prod outage will affect your bonus and be added to your HR record’), but otherwise let people—anyone—code.

winddude 11 hours ago|
I'd be a lot more hesitant now if brin, gates or bezos invited me to a pizza party.
More comments...