this post was submitted on 26 Apr 2026
114 points (93.2% liked)
Technology
84277 readers
3325 users here now
This is a most excellent place for technology news and articles.
Our Rules
- Follow the lemmy.world rules.
- Only tech related news or articles.
- Be excellent to each other!
- Mod approved content bots can post up to 10 articles per day.
- Threads asking for personal tech support may be deleted.
- Politics threads may be removed.
- No memes allowed as posts, OK to post as comments.
- Only approved bots from the list below, this includes using AI responses and summaries. To ask if your bot can be added please contact a mod.
- Check for duplicates before posting, duplicates may be removed
- Accounts 7 days and younger will have their posts automatically removed.
Approved Bots
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Most people have learned by now, that “lines of code“ is a terrible metric for evaluating productivity. Why are we doing the exact same thing with AI tokens now?
Because middle manglement has a constant compulsive need to justify their existence by finding new ways and metrics to "manage".
I’m no developer, just so some casual scripting for my job, but lines of code being a performance metric is a hilarious notion. Like, the indicator of good code is that it’s efficiently written in a small number of lines. It’s similarly just as easy to waste tokens on nothing of value.
I love this story:
I wouldn't mind seeing lines of comments and external documentation as metrics. Perhaps as a ratio to functions or sections. I know, requiring it would just lead to crappy documentation, but that's typically better than none at all, and there's a lot of folks out there just too busy with their brilliance to write up what they just coded.
You would be surprised to know how many managers still rely on this metric, even if it’s not part of their KPIs.
Before ai, my company’s misguided kpi was the number of merge requests
At least that one worked well for me since I’m generally making many small changes to an existing code base
Because companies have been talking up how their adoption of AI is going to make them faster and more able to capitalise on opportunities in order to prop up their valuations for a while now and it seems to work as far as share price goes.
Being able back up this talk with metrics showing that their employees are all in on AI reinforces this, since the share price is the metric the business optimises for over product development employee reviews will index on this over cost effectiveness, and at most big tech companies engineers are very much making every decision with an eye to performance review optimisation (i.e. how it will affect their next review rather than the product they are building)
There is also some lesser incentives in that meta employees care directly about the meta share price since a lot of their compensation is in the form of RSUs.
I'm not condonig this as a desirable state of affairs, just explaining the incentive curve that the actors are following.