(no title)
-__---____-ZXyw | 9 months ago
I mean, I'm guessing that's true. It'd make a lot of sense if they vehemently disliked that. It's hard to make sense of it all otherwise, really.
-__---____-ZXyw | 9 months ago
I mean, I'm guessing that's true. It'd make a lot of sense if they vehemently disliked that. It's hard to make sense of it all otherwise, really.
monero-xmr|9 months ago
A reasonably smart CEO can pretty much understand, in depth, every aspect of their business. But when it comes to tech, which is often the most essential part, they are left grasping, and must rely on the expertise of other people, and thus their destiny is not really in their control, other than by hiring the best they can and throwing money at R&D.
The AI and the hype around it plays into their anxieties, and also makes them feel like they have control over the situation.
In biotech, the Chief Scientific Officer (CSO) is often given much more authority in startups than the CTO in tech startups, I have noticed.
sanderjd|9 months ago
I honestly really don't understand why this would be the case. Software isn't more complicated than any of the other aspects of the business. I think a "reasonably smart" CEO could just ... learn how it works? if it's really so critical to their business.
It's been a long time since I worked for a CEO who didn't understand software.
ghaff|9 months ago
EdwardKrayer|9 months ago
yencabulator|9 months ago
If you think running the output of an LLM as a serverless function in some cloud is a good way to differentiate your business, build a moat, and make a profit, good luck!
wetpaws|9 months ago
[deleted]