A critique from a SaaS entrepreneur outside the AI hype bubble suggests that current tools often just accelerate the creation of corporate fluff, like generating a 50-slide deck for a five-minute meeting. This raises questions about whether AI is creating true productivity gains or just more unnecessary work.
The problem with bad AI-generated work ('slop') isn't just poor writing. It's that subtle inaccuracies or context loss can derail meetings and create long, energy-wasting debates. This cognitive overload makes it difficult for teams to sense-make and ultimately costs more in human time than it saves.
Using AI to generate content without adding human context simply transfers the intellectual effort to the recipient. This creates rework, confusion, and can damage professional relationships, explaining the low ROI seen in many AI initiatives.
Human intuition is a poor gauge of AI's actual productivity benefits. A study found developers felt significantly sped up by AI coding tools even when objective measurements showed no speed increase. The real value may come from enabling tasks that otherwise wouldn't be attempted, rather than simply accelerating existing workflows.
Dylan Field is skeptical that disposable, AI-generated apps will replace complex SaaS products. Real business software must handle countless edge cases, scale with teams, and support shared workflows—a level of complexity and institutional knowledge that today's agents are far from mastering.
Research highlights "work slop": AI output that appears polished but lacks human context. This forces coworkers to spend significant time fixing it, effectively offloading cognitive labor and damaging perceptions of the sender's capability and trustworthiness.
A satirical take highlights a real trend: large enterprises are rolling out AI tools not for tangible ROI but for "digital transformation" optics. Success is measured with fabricated metrics like "AI enablement" to impress boards and investors, while actual usage remains negligible and productivity gains are unverified.
Companies are spending millions on enterprise AI tools not for measurable productivity gains but for "digital transformation" PR. A satirical take highlights a common reality: actual usage is negligible, but made-up metrics create positive investor narratives, making the investment a success in perception, not practice.
Professionals are using AI to write detailed reports, while their managers use AI to summarize them. This creates a feedback loop where AI generates content for other AIs to consume, with humans acting merely as conduits. This "AI slop" replaces deep thought with inefficient, automated communication.
AI dramatically lowers the effort needed to find relevant prospecting information, but this is a double-edged sword. It empowers diligent reps to become hyper-relevant, but it also enables lazy reps to skip genuine effort and blast out slightly-better-but-still-generic messages. The tool amplifies the user's underlying work ethic.
The ease of generating AI summaries is creating low-quality 'slop.' This imposes a hidden productivity cost, as collaborators must waste time clarifying ambiguous or incorrect AI-generated points, derailing work and leading to lengthy, unnecessary corrections.