Chris Sacca recently claimed, "We are super fucked... almost all coding is fucking useless" because AI can now build apps on demand.
I disagree.
What concerns me about Sacca's rhetoric is that he claims this is happening "right now:"
I think other than the highest level of computer science, almost all of the rest of coding is fucking useless.
You and I can go to ChatGPT and be like, 'I wanna build an app that does this, this, and this, and give me the code.' And it spits out the code. And then I've literally said, "Hey, what do I do with this?" And it's like, "oh, no problem. Go here, download this, open this Python thing, and then shove it in here, and then do this." And it just talks you through it.
You just don't need to fucking do it [coding] anymore.
Chris claims that this is already happening:
Everyone can build their own apps with AI
Software developers are already redundant
The implied conclusion is that we won't need traditional SaaS, apps, etc anymore
My response is this:
AI isn't good at generating high-quality software
Producing good software still requires skilled developers and product people
I don't think "personal AI-built apps" will replace mainstream app usage
There will still be a lot of demand for traditional apps, SaaS, etc.
I have yet to see AI generate a fully realized product that isn't full of bugs, bad UI, and poor UX. As Colleen Schnettler recently pointed out, LLMs are good at specific development tasks but can't reliably produce a cohesive whole.
When building a product, you have to sweat the details: each screen, user flow, and interaction. These elements contribute to the overall feeling of quality. A web app feels solid when all its pieces are carefully architected and implemented.
We've all used products that aren't built well and have constant bugs—buttons that don't respond when clicked, pages that randomly crash, and confusing error messages. (This describes a lot of "Indie Hacker" products!) Instead of a cohesive experience, these products feel janky, like they're held together by duct tape.
"While engineers report being dramatically more productive with AI, the actual software we use daily doesn't seem like it's getting noticeably better." – Addy Osmani, head of UX, Google Chrome
If AI is already good at building apps, as Sacca claims, why aren't we seeing noticeably better software?
Commercial-grade software needs to be performant, reliable, and easy to use. It also requires constant maintenance to prevent security threats, outdated dependencies, and bugs.
Simon Willison puts it perfectly:
"LLMs are power-user tools—they're chainsaws disguised as kitchen knives. They look deceptively simple to use—how hard can it be to type messages to a chatbot?—but in reality you need a huge depth of both understanding and experience to make the most of them and avoid their many pitfalls."
Josh Wood follows up on this metaphor:
"A chainsaw is an apt metaphor. Without thinking through each interaction, you'll find that you've mutilated your favorite bonsai tree. You should have used shears instead."
When you watch experienced developers use AI tools, "They're not just accepting what the AI suggests," Osmani notes. "They're constantly refactoring the generated code into smaller, focused modules, adding edge case handling the AI missed, strengthening type definitions and interfaces, questioning architectural decisions, and adding comprehensive error handling."
In our panel discussion, Tyler King hit the nail on the head:
"The hardest part about SaaS was never the building. It's getting anyone to notice you."
Even if your product is good, you need to be able to find customers.
In the past, I've talked about how founders need to stack every advantage they have to get noticed:
SEO skills
Connections
Product quality
Customer service
Paid acquisition skills (ads)
Ability to connect with an audience
Building up a reputation in a given industry
So much good marketing is accumulating these resources over a lifetime and deploying them to get distribution for your product.
The marketing materials AI produces are generic, soulless, and unremarkable. The public has already grown tired of them. What will stand out? The human touch.
As Brian says, "People are craving human connection, human realness. YouTubers do well because people connect with them through video. When I search for something on Google, what do I click on? The Reddit links. Why? Because that's where the humans are."
Another quote of mine is:
"In small business, whoever cares most about the customers, wins."
Small businesses have always competed by being willing to do what the big incumbents wouldn't. When people ask me on Transistor's live chat what the difference is between us and Spotify, I say: "Daniel Ek (Spotify's CEO) isn't answering customer support tickets."
If you ask an AI to generate an app for you, it won't care about the overall experience the way you can.
If you ask an AI to write you a blog post, it won't care about something that resonates with the audience you've been building for 10 years.
For years, indie SaaS founders have put a "made with ❤️ by Jill and Bob" in the footer of their websites. It's the heart that sets us apart.
Cheers,
Justin Jackson
PS: I highly recommend Tim O'Reilly's post if you're interested in this topic.
Connect with me on:
🦋 Bluesky
💼 LinkedIn
🐘 Mastodon