Thread regarding SAS Institute layoffs

@rh

to claim that AI will be like blockchain is devoid from reality. there's a lot of misplaced hype around it, but there's also a lot of substance.

“any software company that has not already embraced AI coding…”

And my blockchain!

@ne Great article, thanks for the link!

"any software company that has not already embraced AI coding agents to improve its code bases and reinvigorate its products will have missed another boat."

Yup.

Upper management are all yes people.

Everyone's just trying to keep a job.

"Now, I still don’t believe it."

Read: https://steve-yegge.medium.com/software-survival-3-0-97a2a6255f7b

and you will get a better sense of where things are headed.

FWIW, any software company that has not already embraced AI coding agents to improve its code bases and reinvigorate its products will have missed another boat.

@bp You’re free to form your own opinions, of course, but I don’t view myself as the victim in either of the cases I was thinking of. The direct victims were the developers; the indirect victims might have been the potential customers and SAS’ profits.

I’m retired so I’d happily identify myself, but I think the post would be taken down. That’s what happened the last time I included my name in a post. But it’s in my username. My first name, anyway.

“Coding agents have taken over.”

I didn’t believe it until I read this: https://x.com/karpathy/status/2015883857489522876

Now, I still don’t believe it.

@fh

“Cook!? Cook!!??? Where’s my Hasenpfeffer!?!”

• “Comin’ right up your Lordship, your graciousness, sir!”

The customer isn’t the king in this game.

"The lack of effect implies little about management and speaks more to the dire lack of contributor capabilities."

OP, do you mean lack of contributor capabilities to produce something the market wants?

So now it's the rank-and-file's fault because they aren't innovating in their spare time?

Maybe in the past, spare time would be required. But individuals can now do great things, all on their own, to bring success to the company. Witness the great Zuckerberg:

Finally, Zuckerberg announced that Meta is investing in AI tools for its workforce, saying the company will elevate individual contributors and flatten teams. “Our north star is building the best place for individuals to make a massive impact,” he said, pointing out that what many big teams at Meta are doing can now be accomplished by “a single, very talented person.” [ https://fortune.com/2026/01/28/meta-q4-earnings-beat-mark-zuckerberg-ai-acceleration ]

Coding agents have taken over. Now, a single person, say an NCSU graduate, could change the world. It will just take breaking the mental bonds of servitude and the discard of the old, hierarchical mental models of business operation. Blame for failure to step up will land directly on everyone because everyone has been given the keys to the AI kingdom - all for the low, low price of $20 per month.

Upper management are all yes people. And they say yes to a party of one. No innovation occured or will occur if that party of one only believes they know best. And they will continue to promote other yes people. The cycle will continue on and on.

@b1 I had the same experience.

Sadly, I think upper management actually wants innovation. But I found middle management consistently hostile to new ideas.

@bc maybe… or maybe they did. Neither you nor I know.

I usually don’t give the benefit of the doubt to someone who is playing the victim anonymously though.

@bb Or maybe they didn’t su-k.

@b1 Maybe your ideas weren’t innovative at all. Or su-ked.

Their job isn’t to smile and move forward with every idea presented.

@OP

I rate this post troll / 10. Well done.

How about top management quashing innovative ideas that are brought to them? Is it fair to blame them for that? Because that’s what I experienced first-hand.

Perhaps they should bring in some interns from the NC State College of Design. Get some fresh perspectives.

Maybe the interns have innovative ideas, and can give the products a fresh, new look?

“…five, six, eight years to go into production…”

Benny Hill does software development. Queue theme.

Historically, the vision of upper management has been sound. Vertical products were intended to open new markets. SAS Cloud was intended to provide flexibility, security, and collaboration. Viya was intended to bring more power to the users.

None of these were bad ideas. It's not the vision that's been lacking, but the execution.

One reason has been the consistent discouraging of innovation. Management actually seems to believe that an Innovation Day encourages innovation. But it's just lip service. Innovation takes more than a day. A healthy organization would encourage new ideas all year long.

During my years at SAS I saw many incompetent managers with a large percentage of sycophants. These people could not encourage innovation, because they could not tell a good idea from a bad idea. They could only tell their idea from your idea -- which made their decision easy.

There were also, to be sure, many good and talented managers at SAS. But they had to compromise with those who could not.

The result was that SAS went into existing markets, against established vendors, with no advantage. We could not say, "You should buy our software because it includes our brilliant innovations". We didn't have many.

Add to that the agonizingly slow development cycles that resulted from incompetent managers building products they did not understand. Many times I saw new products take five, six, eight years to go production. When they finally shipped, management would tout them as successes -- while in the meantime, our competitors had moved faster.

The problem wasn't a lack of vision, but a consistent failure of execution.

I gave up and left some years ago. SAS has some new managers in place now, and I hope they succeed. Good luck to all.

This is satire.

Senior manager and above typing detected

I personally fault our intern who is a rising junior for all of SAS's struggles in the past 10 years.

The buck ends with Big Jim. If he aint buying, you aint selling.

So now it's the rank-and-file's fault because they aren't innovating in their spare time? Meanwhile, the folks being paid 3?4?5?6? times as much to drive innovation, but aren't, are absolved of responsibility? Nice!