zlacker

[return to "Why software stocks are getting pummelled"]
1. latefo+G02[view] [source] 2026-02-02 19:39:18
>>peteth+(OP)
> The fear is that these [AI] tools are allowing companies to create much of the software they need themselves.

AI-generated code still requires software engineers to build, test, debug, deploy, secure, monitor, be on-call, support, handle incidents, and so on. That's very expensive. It is much cheaper to pay a small monthly fee to a SaaS company.

◧◩
2. rglull+A72[view] [source] 2026-02-02 20:06:42
>>latefo+G02
> AI-generated code still requires software engineers

No, they don't.

A domain expert armed with an Excel spreadsheet and the ability to write VBA macros will be enough for most business.

◧◩◪
3. kube-s+Yc2[view] [source] 2026-02-02 20:29:28
>>rglull+A72
I guess that's technically true, because "most businesses" are sole proprietorships without any employees... but they could get by just fine with a checkbook and a note pad.

But the reasons the business software sector grew far beyond Excel of the 1990s is because of the inherent limitations in scaling solutions built by business analysts inside of Excel. There's a vague cutoff somewhere in the middle of the SMB market where software architecture starts to matter and the consequences for fuckup are higher than the cost of paying for professionally made software with, importantly, a vendor on the hook for making sure it doesn't fuck up.

◧◩◪◨
4. forget+pj2[view] [source] 2026-02-02 20:56:55
>>kube-s+Yc2
Uh, no. The main reason the software sector grew in the 90s was a particularly potent combination of FOMO, kickbacks, and strategically deployed cocaine.
◧◩◪◨⬒
5. kube-s+r63[view] [source] 2026-02-03 00:25:14
>>forget+pj2
Do you forget how much different offices looked back in the 90s?
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
6. forget+ZK3[view] [source] 2026-02-03 05:43:58
>>kube-s+r63
No, no I don't. I also remember what tech sales looked like in the 90s and aughts. Jokes about strippers and blow were a cliche for a reason.
[go to top]