Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

Jensen is pushing back on the AI will kill all software narrative just like he pushed back last year on the DeepSeek panic. He was right then. He will be right again. "There's this notion that .. the software industry is in decline and will be replaced by AI....

112,469 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад •via X (Twitter)

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

This is the biggest irony in tech history. Microsoft beat revenue estimates. Stock plunged 11%, wiped out $400 BILLION in market cap. Salesforce reported growth. Stock fell 5.6%. ServiceNow beat earnings. Stock crashed 11%. SAP beat projections. Stock dropped 16%. Entire software sector entered bear market territory. Down 22% from peak. These are the companies everyone said would WIN from AI. They spent billions BUYING AI companies. ServiceNow: $7.75 billion for Armis. Salesforce: $8 billion for Informatica. They launched AI products. Built AI workflows. Hired AI teams. And the market said: You're all dead. Because investors just realized something nobody wanted to admit: AI doesn't make software companies stronger. AI makes software companies OBSOLETE. Morgan Stanley: "In an environment of heightened investor skepticism, stable growth falls short of shifting the narrative." Good earnings aren't enough anymore. The market is pricing in a world where AI replaces the software these companies sell. ServiceNow CEO tried defending on the earnings call: "AI needs workflow orchestration. ServiceNow is the gateway to this shift." Market response: 11% crash. Because here's what he didn't say: If AI can write code, automate workflows, and generate apps at a fraction of the cost, why would anyone pay $50,000 per year for enterprise software licenses? The per-seat pricing model that made SaaS companies rich is getting murdered by AI efficiency. One AI agent replaces 10 seats. One prompt replaces months of custom development. One LLM call replaces entire software categories. Klarna already proved it. CEO said they pulled Salesforce out of their stack. Built everything themselves using AI. And that's just the beginning. The software apocalypse hit hardest on companies that INVESTED IN AI: Atlassian: down 12.6% Intuit: down 7.8% HubSpot: down 11.5% Zscaler: down 6.3% Meanwhile, the companies ENABLING AI made money: Nvidia: up Semiconductor stocks: surging Memory firms: rallying The divide is brutal. Hardware companies print cash. Software companies get destroyed. Because in an AI-first world, you need GPUs to build the models. But you don't need software subscriptions when the AI builds the software for you. Jim Cramer called it the "P/E multiple compression crisis." Translation: Investors don't care about earnings anymore. They care about whether your business model survives the next 5 years. And right now software business models look doomed. They're literally stuck: If they DON'T invest in AI, they fall behind. If they DO invest in AI, they cannibalize their own products. It's a death spiral with no exit. ServiceNow spent $12 BILLION on acquisitions in 2025 alone. Trying to buy their way into relevance. And yesterday the market cooked them. The craziest thing to me tho... Most software companies beat earnings. Revenue was solid. Growth was fine. But it didn't matter. Because the market stopped pricing software on what it earns TODAY. It's pricing software on what it's worth in a world where AI does the job for free. And in that world these companies are worth nothing. This is the biggest sector repricing since 2008. $500 billion in market value gone in ONE DAY. And it's not stopping. Because every company watching this is thinking the same thing: "If I can replace ServiceNow with 3 AI agents and save $10 million per year, why wouldn't I?" The answer used to be: "Because you need enterprise-grade reliability." But now? AI agents are getting reliable. Fast. Software companies just realized they're competing with open-source models that cost $0.02 per 1,000 tokens. You can't win a pricing war against free. The companies that spent BILLIONS preparing for AI are getting killed BY AI. What an irony.

Ricardo

1,813,369 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Some personal hot takes from AI: engineer Miami follows... 1. Software development is a dead-end profession because anyone can be a software developer now. 2. Anyone can use Cursor or any other tool and generate code. Being a coder and being a software engineer are different. 3. Computers used to be gated; now everyone has the power to make computers malleable. Everyone is a software developer now, but that does not mean they are software engineers 4. If you cannot demonstrate how a coding agent works, you are just a consumer and have imposed an artificial glass ceiling on your career as a software engineer. 5. If you are curious, you will have a job. If you have not been curious in the last two years, you are replaceable. 6. SaaS per-seat economics may become unstable as customers need fewer people to achieve results, prompting founders to think about new unit economics 7. Most companies will take two or three years (or more!) to figure out AI transformation. 8. Some companies are already building AI native teams of five to ten people who can build with the grain of AI 9. There will be an explosion in the number of software developers. Software development is now essentially free, and tokens are cheaper than humans 10. Not enough engineers know what it means to be a product engineer 11. JIRA ticket monkeys are cooked 12. If your company has banned AI, you should quit that company 13. AI is more like a musical instrument than just a tool play with it, make discoveries, build intuition learn where AI is good and where it fails

geoff

55,287 просмотров • 12 дней назад

Jensen Huang explains exactly how to make sure that AI doesn't take your job. "Your job has to be more than the task." If it is, he says there will most likely be more than enough work for you to do because AI will create more jobs than it destroys. Listen to him explain the difference between "jobs" and "tasks," and why this difference will have such a profound impact on the types of work that humans will do in an AI powered future. ---------- Joe: But don't you think there's many jobs that AI will replace if your job, particularly automation? Jensen: If your job is the task. Joe: So automation. Factory workers. Jensen: Yeah. If your job is the task, Joe: That's a lot of people. Jensen: It could be a lot of people. Yeah. But it'll probably generate, like for example, I'm super excited about the robots Elon's working on It's still a few years away. When it happens, there's a whole new industry of technicians and people will have to manufacture the robots, right? And so that job never existed. And so you're gonna have a whole industry of people taking care of, like for example, you know, all the mechanics and all the people who are building things for cars, supercharging cars, that didn't exist before cars. And now we're gonna have robots. You're gonna have robot apparels. So a whole industry. Because I want my robot to look different than your robot. ... Joe: Don't you think that will all be automated though? Jensen: No, not all of it. Joe: Don't think that'll be done by other robots Jensen: Eventually. And then there'll be something else. Joe: So you think ultimately people just adapt except if you are the task, which is a large percentage of the workforce. Jensen: If your job is just to chop vegetables, Cuisinart is gonna replace you. Joe: So people have to find meaning in other things. Jensen: Your job has to be more than the task. ---------- Link to the full conversation on YouTube below 👇

Hans C Nelson 🗽

87,374 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

David Friedberg: “Gaming is the future of entertainment, and the future of gaming is AI.” @jason: “Friedberg, what are your thoughts on the gaming industry versus social media versus traditional media?” david friedberg: “One way to answer that question is to think about how people spend their time.” “Do you spend more minutes on social media, or on traditional media, or playing games? And how is that trending?” “But importantly, which of those will accrue more benefit, and as a result, drive more hours spent from AI?” “One way to think about this thesis is that AI is going to ultimately accrue to video game entertainment far more than social media entertainment or traditional content.” “If you believe in AI, and you believe in the improvements in productivity, generally speaking, people in the industrialized world will generally have more free time on their hands and be able to support themselves with the deflationary effects of AI over time.” “So if there's more time on people's hands, the general market for entertainment is growing, and if the general market for entertainment is growing, gaming is the future of entertainment, and the future of gaming is AI.” “Because I think you can create dynamic, more engaging experiences that will benefit from a back and forth sort of relationship than you can with traditional content or with social media.” “If you're a noob in Fortnite, like you're an early player in Fortnite, you're mostly playing against AI, because what they do is they tune the AI to be easier to beat so that you can slowly develop your skills.” “What was happening early was they were seeing a high degree of churn in Fortnite because kids would go on and play for the first time and they'd get paired up with kids that were better than them, and so they would never win, and they would get frustrated and they would quit the game and stop.” “So the churn rate was high. So AI unlocked higher engagement and higher retention, and I think we're seeing that in a lot of different gaming platforms now.” “So AI can be used, for example, to maximally increase time, engagement, satisfaction, happiness.”

The All-In Podcast

70,365 просмотров • 9 месяцев назад