The dotcom bubble was the whole investor industry trying to capitalize on the internet, and they just failed because they were investing everything in a new thing people didn’t need yet.
Today we live in an interconnected world, close to what was promised to the investors back then.
In ten, twenty years, once the bubble, OpenAI, Anthropic and all that are long buried, in what form do you think AI will exist? Do you think it will be an improved version of our current-day LLMs, or a different form of AI? Or do you imagine something else altogether?
If you don’t work in tech or software development, it’ll be very hard for you to understand what this tech is doing within that space.
As a game developer who has worked in professional environments for about 15 years, I can say this is the most dramatic shift in working patterns in my own lifetime. A lot of it has to do with the mechanics, some of which are physical limitations. Humans can type around 300 wpm, and maybe you can stretch that with an integrated environment that has some intelligence around auto complete and so on. However, AI can write at 6000 wpm. This is a modern John Henry problem: even the best programmer could not out write the AI, and I think the best programmer partnered with an AI will always beat the best programmer without it. In all honesty, humans make tons of mistakes, and programming has many patterns that reappear. I’m not sure if the human+keyboard is the best interface to write code. Likewise, an agent without clear context is somewhat worthless & will generate poorly architected projects.
I don’t think AI’s assault on software development translates to all industries. Agriculture may use AI to inform how they do things, and eventually, machines could then take that knowledge and run the farm for you. The reality is that’s coming, but maybe 20 years or something. It’s not today, not tomorrow, and not for a while.
Other industries have greater risk profiles compared to game development. If a game is programmed poorly, so what? If a medical app is programmed poorly, someone could die. Legal & financial apps programmed by AI have meaningful risk profiles as well. Sure, AI will impact them, but it must be slower due to the considerations at hand.
In December of 2025, I would have said an AI bubble is going to pop. Now, I’m really not so sure. It’s upending how I’m used to working, and I struggle predicting the future. A few years ago, I would say I had a good sense of how to position myself & my career for a long term plan. Now, colleagues of mine with more tenure than me say, “I can’t predict what’s next.” This is pervasive once AI tools enter your workflow. It really is magic at times, talking to a machine & watching a game come into existence.
This is buttressed by people showing me memes of ChatGPT screwing up the count of R’s in strawberry & other silly memes. The reality is the consumer models are different than the business models, and integrated agents (ones with access to a scripting environment) can be very powerful compared to a chatbot. It’s like comparing an e-bike to a car: they each get you somewhere faster than walking, but the scale of capabilities changes quite a bit.
AI will need to find new patterns outside of LLMs in order to actually create something like AGI. LLMs are a mechanical process, a regression towards the mean at scale, but its still very powerful. You could write code on punch cards, or in a language with a compiler. AI feels like it is a big step, in that way.
For my own area, my hopeful self wants to believe that this will enable new voices & projects to exist that would have required significant funding or hard, multi-disciplinary skills prior, or a combination of them. You can hack an unbelievable amount of the game dev process for what’s basically $100/mn, compared to what would have been a burn rate of +$100k/mn for a small dev team. That is transformational.
At the same time, my pessimistic self sees things like arcade.gov, which is a fucking travesty & embarassment to the medium, clearly vibe coded by some nepo-baby with connections. The Skyrim IKEA shelf meme mod, while funny, is a marketing stunt. More of these sort of projects are coming, where the game is a vehicle for something else (a product, a brand, a person). We had Sneak King & Cool Spot, but I mean the scale. I think those sort of projects will be normalized, or at the least, many more will exist than today. If you look up AI disclosures on steam, it’s turning into a hockey stick.
It feels like Pandora’s box has been opened. I don’t think it’s all smoke & mirrors. It will not impact all industries equally. It won’t fix humans being poorly intended or malicious actors seeking power & wealth. In many ways, they benefit the most (giving capital more access to creativity). It’s built on the largest scale theft of public good for profit. To me, that’s wrong, and the people/masses should be getting financial returns, collectively & universally, in exchange for what was stolen.
I mean I still prefer writing code by hand and I still write higher quality code faster by hand than others on my team who use LLMs to write code for them. Writing good, production intent, software is not about wpm, nor is more code necessarily better. Concision (as long as it doesn’t sacrifice readability) is a virtue.
I agree with pretty much all your points. I use AI every day to do the typing for me, but not the thinking. It’s saved me from mistakes and makes me far more productive. However there is no way it could replace what I do.
It’s probably going to take a few years, but eventually I think devs will finally realize that the typing is the thinking.
There are projects I worked on 5+ years ago that I can still describe in intimate detail. I remember the design decisions, I remember the concessions I had to make for technical or business reasons, I remember they connect to other systems, etc. Then by contrast I have code I wrote with Claude ~2 months ago and I can barely remember a single fucking thing about it… I did all the same planning and made all the same kinds of decisions, the only difference is that I didn’t write the actual code.
And that makes sense. When you physically engage with the code by manually typing, you’re creating connections in your brain that you don’t get just from reviewing it. It’s exactly the same reinforcement mechanism you get from taking physical notes during a lecture versus just passively listening. Physical engagement builds memory and sharpens understanding.
Two or three years from now, when all of the projects minted in the '23-'26 era have aged into ‘legacy’ status and the AI-generated technical debt has been left to proliferate unchecked, things are going to start breaking in ways that the LLMs won’t be able to reason their way out of. Maybe they’ll be able to ‘fix’ bugs as they pop up, but in slopified code fixing something in component A is inevitably going to break something in component B, and fixing something in component B will break component C, etc. Eventually you’ll end up with a disgusting, agentic ouroboros of regressions, and the only devs left in the industry will be wishing they hadn’t mortgaged all of their intelligence on short-term productivity gains — most of which only benefited the shitty tech companies that were so desperate to replace them.
The typing is the means of communicating the thinking. If you are “doing the thinking” and the AI is doing the “typing” then either you are instructing the AI to generate additional content without original thought (which is a waste of your time, the AI’s time, and the reader’s time), or the AI is actually doing some of the thinking (in which case your job can be automated).
The programers use AI to make art. The artists use AI to write. The writers use AI to program. I think we’re all in denial by both just how much our own value is at risk, and also the real value of AI (less than advertised). A bit paradoxical.