The thing that keeps on getting glided past in most discussions of this is the distinction between systems of record and systems of workflow.

If you're SAP, Workday, Procore, maybe even HubSpot, you have a shout. Growth won't be fast, but you're okay for now and might even be able to position yourself as an integrator.

If you've raised large rounds and you're just a system of workflow that won't trigger a years long political fight to get you out - a document review startup, good luck.

Amazon isn't losing money because Anthropic released a tool that does stuff...

I am assuming the author doesn’t know much about how this flow actually goes since he didn’t get into that at all.

It is annoying to see a complex field as law being judge by stock prices of some SaaS products or w/e they are basing this on.

Could have at least gave it some effort and interviewed 2-3 people that use these kind of products but that would be too much work surely.

It is not surprising that people that slop like LLMs are so into LLMs

The author of this article should strongly consider learning to write before sharing another

I mean, Markdown is just a way of storing information.

If the title said "WS just lost $285B because of 13 documents", people would have said "Why mention the documents? We get that people who move money around use documents".

Does this article say anything of substance? So you found a repo with 13 markdown files; what about it? I see absolutely nothing about it. Does it have to do with "SaaS legal review"? I see no relation whatsoever.

SaaS is generally defined as cloud based software. What has it do with easier replacement by AI?

In fact it should be opposite. Local utility software has higher chance of being replaced by AI as then you wouldn't worry about server and state and all the complexities of storage.

Also the article mention stock drop of "technology companies", which is basically stock drop of top 5 companies, like Nvidia and Apple, which is not even related to SaaS.

I have been working tirelessly trying to explain to gullible investors this EXACT thing.

Responding to the headline and not the article substance: no, the SaaS crash is a crash because valuations are speculative and have been very high. Security price motion is only very loosely coupled to fundamentals in the short term, and this moment in history is both highly volatile and unanimously held to be overpriced. Ergo, crash.

That doesn't speak to the fundamentals, with which I only sort of agree. There are SaaS products that just grease inter-human interactions that would be hard to manage otherwise, and these are dead in the water. There are others that manage data human beings will always need to be able to understand, even if the AI is doing the work[1], which are much safer.

[1] Like bug trackers. We all love to hate Jira, but even if you have an army of Claudes doing your coding and testing for you someone somewhere needs to know what still needs to be fixed before shipment.

elon musk saud that the next wave is agents (optimus human in a box) clicking around the old SaaS apps, not agents writing new apps to replace them

microsoft ceo said the same thing - agents will be using windows/office and be the bigger buyers of licenses

replacing SaaS software at this scale is hard, nobody will risk it, at least near term