Just want to clarify, this is not my Substack, I’m just sharing this because I found it insightful.
The author describes himself as a “fractional CTO”(no clue what that means, don’t ask me) and advisor. His clients asked him how they could leverage AI. He decided to experience it for himself. From the author(emphasis mine):
I forced myself to use Claude Code exclusively to build a product. Three months. Not a single line of code written by me. I wanted to experience what my clients were considering—100% AI adoption. I needed to know firsthand why that 95% failure rate exists.
I got the product launched. It worked. I was proud of what I’d created. Then came the moment that validated every concern in that MIT study: I needed to make a small change and realized I wasn’t confident I could do it. My own product, built under my direction, and I’d lost confidence in my ability to modify it.
Now when clients ask me about AI adoption, I can tell them exactly what 100% looks like: it looks like failure. Not immediate failure—that’s the trap. Initial metrics look great. You ship faster. You feel productive. Then three months later, you realize nobody actually understands what you’ve built.


Holy shit, you’re a fucking retard. Like of the “people look and laugh” scale. I’m unironically going to take your response to share with technical people in my life to laugh over
And no hate to the mentally ill, I’ve never laughed at them. I laugh with them, because they’re delightful and love joy to an extent that leaves me jealous
But you’re not a real person. You’re a joke, if your ego was two sizes smaller I’d be gently explaining to you how no number of code katas would result in Microsoft XP