The mention of "HubSpot" triggered a memory... https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11369632 - wow, can't believe how long ago this was! Anyways, not surprised that a company where 1 + 1 = 3 would be big on AI.
Honestly its been pretty wild to see this company succeed over the years. They took on Salesforce and everyone predicted they were going to fail. Yet year over year they've continued to succeed.
The article isn’t providing a lot of convincing data that AI improved much of anything, only that it didn’t cause incidents.
I really don’t understand why AI usage is mandatory for roles. Nobody’s doing anything like that for other productivity tools even when they’re proven to be helpful. Hell, a lot of employers can’t be bothered to provide basics like nice keyboards and monitors that exceed 1080p.
The current era of tech has way too many corporate losers.
If you're looking for a company to blame for the endless Google results of "top-10 ways of doing X" or "the best new vacuum cleaners review", look no further than HubSpot. Their business model was based on helping small business gain traction by writing a a lot of verbose blog posts. So now when you're looking how to fix a leaking faucet, you first have to read about the history of faucets.
I was really looking for tangible, actionable advice since I'm facing slow adoption in my org. This post seems to hide behind the "secret sauce" that it claims made all of the difference.
A way I've been developing and is working really well is to identify high level "goals" of the day or week by analyzing their AI chats first.
Then, measure time taken, AI usage, and sentiment of AI usage.
With this, we find out how quickly was the task done, how much AI was used, and whether the individual was frustrated at any point and if the process went smoothly etc.
My system already hooks into top AI providers and measures these outcomes for engineers. Working on measuring other use cases. Email in profile if anyone wants to chat.
Now of course we can't do a blind comparison with the exact same task, but this at least gives insights into usage, outcomes, and ease-of-use.
I'm a bit surprised to see so many negative comments targeted at HubSpot. I got to final round interviews with them a little while back and came away with a very positive impression. Where does all the hate come from? Just their association with marketing in general and the fight over the book about them?
13 comments
[ 3.2 ms ] story [ 37.0 ms ] threadI really don’t understand why AI usage is mandatory for roles. Nobody’s doing anything like that for other productivity tools even when they’re proven to be helpful. Hell, a lot of employers can’t be bothered to provide basics like nice keyboards and monitors that exceed 1080p.
The current era of tech has way too many corporate losers.
No mention of how this was measured.
…unless they have something to show, specifically?
Demos? Code? Details?
Nothing?
Then, measure time taken, AI usage, and sentiment of AI usage.
With this, we find out how quickly was the task done, how much AI was used, and whether the individual was frustrated at any point and if the process went smoothly etc.
My system already hooks into top AI providers and measures these outcomes for engineers. Working on measuring other use cases. Email in profile if anyone wants to chat.
Now of course we can't do a blind comparison with the exact same task, but this at least gives insights into usage, outcomes, and ease-of-use.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/HubSpot#Controversy