Many technical leaders initially dismissed generative AI for its failures on simple logical tasks. However, its rapid, tangible improvement over a short period forces a re-evaluation and a crucial mindset shift towards adoption to avoid being left behind.

Related Insights

Borovik's realization came from observing artists' split reaction to Stable Diffusion—fear versus embracing it as a new tool. He saw a direct parallel for software engineering, deciding AI was a tool to enhance his craft, not replace it, which spurred his move into building coding agents at Google.

A 2022 study by the Forecasting Research Institute has been reviewed, revealing that top forecasters and AI experts significantly underestimated AI advancements. They assigned single-digit odds to breakthroughs that occurred within two years, proving we are consistently behind the curve in our predictions.

Block's CTO observes a U-shaped curve in AI adoption among engineers. The most junior engineers embrace it naturally, like digital natives. The most senior engineers are also highly eager, as they recognize the potential to automate tedious tasks they've performed countless times, freeing them up for high-level architectural work.

Users mistakenly evaluate AI tools based on the quality of the first output. However, since 90% of the work is iterative, the superior tool is the one that handles a high volume of refinement prompts most effectively, not the one with the best initial result.

The initial magic of GitHub's Copilot wasn't its accuracy but its profound understanding of natural language. Early versions had a code completion acceptance rate of only 20%, yet the moments it correctly interpreted human intent were so powerful they signaled a fundamental technology shift.

To effectively leverage AI, treat it as a new team member. Take its suggestions seriously and give it the best opportunity to contribute. However, just like with a human colleague, you must apply a critical filter, question its output, and ultimately remain accountable for the final result.

The main barrier to AI's impact is not its technical flaws but the fact that most organizations don't understand what it can actually do. Advanced features like 'deep research' and reasoning models remain unused by over 95% of professionals, leaving immense potential and competitive advantage untapped.

Leaders often misjudge their teams' enthusiasm for AI. The reality is that skepticism and resistance are more common than excitement. This requires framing AI adoption as a human-centric change management challenge, focusing on winning over doubters rather than simply deploying new technology.

Kevin Rose argues against forming fixed opinions on AI capabilities. The technology leapfrogs every 4-8 weeks, meaning a developer who found AI coding assistants "horrible" three months ago is judging a tool that is now 3-4 times better. One must continuously re-evaluate AI tools to stay current.

Data on AI tool adoption among engineers is conflicting. One A/B test showed that the highest-performing senior engineers gained the biggest productivity boost. However, other companies report that opinionated senior engineers are the most resistant to using AI tools, viewing their output as subpar.