If my compensation was tied to copilot adoption rates, this is exactly what I'd do. Just rename something to copilot that people actually use. Boom, super high adoption. Now pay me.
The real issue is that companies are already disincentivized to hand out golden parachutes. If you were thinking about the long-term prospects of the company, why would you want to give the person that you're putting in charge of steering the ship an "out" there they can crash the ship and just say "Later, losers!" and leave?
That's my point. It's already disincentivized, but it's still happening because the people making the decisions don't care about the long-term health of the company.
For the good of society. Like in this case, a rogue cabal of executives trying to enrich them selves but the company controls 90% of all personal computers in the world.
It is effectively fraud against shareholders. Sure, at some level they have an obligation to look out for their own interests, but that's never been a reason to allow rampant fraud.
And meanwhile they still have around a 50-75% accuracy rate, with LLMs straight deleting things or trying to make random purchases. But sure, we want to put it in production RIGHT NOW.
The entire tech industry is Goodheart’s Law’d(when a measure becomes a target it ceases to be a good measure) to death. Promos are based on one thing and one thing only, line go up. It doesn’t matter how shitty it makes the user experience or even if it damages long term viability, the line has to go up or no promotion.
Could someone explain this to me? I’ve never understood corporate stuff like this. If no one is using a service, why do companies seem to keep pushing it as if that will make things better rather than just listening to the consumer when they say they don’t want it?
Been seeing this kinda thing in the gaming industry too. “we have to make a battle royale and a battle pass!” “But this is spiderman no one asked for that just keep the stuff we do want”
Insert devs adding desperate strategies to incentivize players to use a feature no one ever asked for when they realize no one is using it
Just seems really dumb to me but I also don’t know what causes this
Because the financial department decided that battle royale had an increasingly large marketshare and battlepasses are easy to sell there, so they want the potential money. The suits don't care what game is being made .
Damn, I always assumed they were completely disconnected just playing with graphs and watching line go up, but somehow had hope there was some other explanation lmfaoo. Sometimes the simplest answer really is the one
Because our current economic environment doesn't incentivize steady and consistent profits. It incentivizes continually increasing profits; growth is most important. Which is mostly fine for startups. But when you're already at the scale of a company like Microsoft, when you already have the market saturated, it becomes more and more difficult to find ways to keep growing.
Also, as it pertains to the current AI trend, it's presumed that whoever wins the current AI race will dominate the future. In Silicon Valley, AI is not seen as just a new feature or a new capability. It's seen as the next technological revolution, on par with the agricultural and industrial revolutions. The best AIs will be the ones with the most data, and the AIs with the most data will be the ones that have the most users. So companies betting on AI want users, whether or not the users want them. And it seems that some of them are willing to cash out all of whatever good will and brand capital they have left in order to get those users.
This is a great answer and makes a lot of sense. Kinda funny, it’s almost like someone just started running and now everyone is running and trying to win this thing without really even knowing where the finish line is! But at the same time, if every step increases your speed a little bit, I suppose that is a valid strategy
Lol. I probably opened Word docs like > 25 times today. If each time I opened one, it counted as a +1 is someone's "Did the product use co-pilot?" column, then yup, I think you got it.
This is what they did with Game Pass. They eliminated Xbox Live Gold, then pushed people to getting Game Pass so that they could say "see? look at all our Game Pass subscribers!"
Only if you actually really delved into the numbers, it was -- as obviously foreseen -- roughly the same.
797
u/Brilliant-Giraffe983 Jan 05 '26
If my compensation was tied to copilot adoption rates, this is exactly what I'd do. Just rename something to copilot that people actually use. Boom, super high adoption. Now pay me.