Monologue: AI Isn't Replacing Software Companies, Calm Down About Claude Code

This is an iHeart Podcast, guaranteed human.

Run a business and not thinking about podcasting, think again.

“More Americans listen to podcasts than add supported streaming music from Spotify and Pandora,”

and as the number one podcaster, iHeart's twice as large as the next two combined. Learn how podcasting can help your business. Call 844-844-iHeart. Hello and welcome to this week's "Better Offline Monologue." I'm your host Ed Zehrtron.

In the last few weeks, there's been a dramatic sell-off in software stocks driven by the anxiety that companies will, instead of paying for someone like Salesforce or Microsoft, simply build their own software.

It is a genuinely stupid assumption based on analysts and reporters that simply do not care

about the truth. In their mind, one can simply type, build me Salesforce now into cloud code and have it barf out an identical functional clone that's compliant, secure, stable,

“or because somebody was able to bunk it on the head and have times to spout something that's”

sort of look like a tool like Trello, maybe, or a personal website. Look, when you pay a software company, even a dog-git mediocre one, a monthly fee. You're not just paying them to access the software, but to take away the burden of maintenance that comes with running a software company. Minor things like currency changes or timezone shifting can cause major problems in systems

that aren't built with intention. You know, like something in LLM would spit out,

and things get even more complicated when you start connecting other systems of record,

like billing or a customer's personal information, especially if they're in Europe, by the way. Plan to have any of that information actually connect with a customer's systems, where you're going to need a sock to order, and you're definitely going to need to make sure it's got rock-solid security so that nobody can swipe all of that data and then you get sued. I also assume you're going to effectively take an engineer off of one of your teams,

probably for good to be honest, to maintain your new internal sales force, Monday, Microsoft 365, and Notion clones. You Trello cloned as well, probably you're a son or what, I mean, how much software are you going to build? Good thing you've got clawed code to help speed that up, right? Just make sure you read everything it writes, because every little fuck-up just became your problem, and you've got nobody to scream at, because while your company

is saving $15 per seat per month, you've also fired the people whose job it is to make sure you're nasty little software subscriptions actually fucking function. And while you may fear that a boss might try and force this down your throat to save money, I must be clear how impossible this task is. Even the most annoying frustrating suffer as a service contract protects you from the grueling underlying maintenance and infrastructural bullshit that goes into making sure the thing

you're paying for actually loads and functions wherever you load in. And even on the browser that you want to load it in, in most cases, thank you, Riverside. The people pushing this narrative or either fundamentally disconnect from how the world works or actively incentivize to mislead you. I've seen this narrative, propagated on multiple different business television shows, and supposedly respectable outlets, and it makes me genuinely worried that we don't have a

media industry prepared to dissect fundamentally deceptive narratives. Just because it's possible for a non-coder to cobble together a website that looks near identical to a model's training data in the space of an hour, doesn't mean that we're replacing every software company. Nor is it's ability to do so any indicator that we'll be able to do more than that in the future. I plead with the media, please stop filling in the gaps,

please stop seeing every incremental improvement as proof of whatever marketing slot worry oamide or clammy sample when he's trying to cram down your throats. You're being played, you're being conned, and by extension you're conning your listeners, your readers and your viewers,

“and once the bubble pops I believe they will demand an explanation from you. I certainly will.”

I'm really in this era. I think people are underselling how bigger reckoning there will be when the bubble collapses. How are we meant to trust anybody who the ciferously pushed this or who got obsessed with AI? One sort of this falls apart. When I say falls apart, I mean that the current rates that you are paying are not even close to being sustainable. I'm currently working on a piece called The Haters Guide to Anthropica, my premium newsletter, and I found a mathematical

study that found the on a $20 a month, Claude subscription. You can spend over $100 of anthropics API tokens, and on the $200 a month, about $2,300 to $2,700. I guess it takes money to lose money, but this is the reality of the AI bubble. Everything you were using is being subsidized. It's being subsidized by these companies in the hopes that it kind of begs into your life, except it's not

Good enough to do that.

to make you think that there's more happening than a tool that might be able to kind of build a

website sort of or build you some half functional software that may be works sometimes. And when it comes to actually building that into something you could sell and you'll shit out a lot. You actually do need to code. And even the things that you vibe code won't really secure or functional. And even that mediocre web slot you're seeing spooned out by Claude code is heavily subsidized. If people had to pay the real rates, those people you see jacking off on Twitter about Claude code,

they'd be paying $200 plus dollars a day. Do you think they'd actually pay that? Do you think that's actually happening? Because I'm sick and fucking tired of hearing all the people

rambling about Claude code writing all the goddamn code. I'm sick and tired of it because I don't

see what the endpoint is. I don't hear an actual result from this. I don't think people should be laid off. But if this was doing the thing that they were saying it would, let us be happening and that would be definitively connected to AI or more software would be being shipped that's actually good. Just more software existing doesn't mean the software's functional or useful. And if you look at vibe-coded apps, they all kind of look the same. And that's a result of the

more using the same training data. And it's why these things are not really good at building, nuanced or unique software. Because that's not what they do. They copy software that's already

been written. And they do so with no intention, no real plan. And nothing you can look back

“on and say, "Oh, right, that's why they built it this way." And perhaps that's not a problem”

as you're a solo person building your own deadly little app. But expand that to 1,000 people or 10,000 people. Let's say 5, 10 years passes. And let's take one of these, what I think a bullshit statements about how, oh, 90% of our codes written by AI. Great. Why happens in three years or four years when you go and look back in that ego? Shit, why did we do that? Are the person left? Or the person didn't leave. They just been drinking heavily. And I don't really remember what

they were prompting the model with. And, oh man, how do we actually see why they built this or what the reason was? This becomes a huge problem when things start breaking. But when you have to make things more efficient. And then people will say, oh, we use AI to fix them. At some point, you're just looking at a kind of a rat's nest of crap of code written unintentionally, spooned out. Meaningless. How do you fix that long term? How do you build an efficient software

package out that? How do you build software that continues to run well into the future? Is the idea that you just build AI on AI? God, no. Anyway, I think once the real costs are charged, people are going to drop this shit like a bad habit. I can't wait. I'm going to be smart about it. I'm going to be annoying about it. I'm not going to lie. But I think based on the YouTube comments, you're all going to join me. Now, next week, we've got more hate a season,

and I'll be back with one of these monologues, maybe, or perhaps I'll give you multiple interviews. Done some weird ones, got Victoria's song on wellness, got Adam Becker on Epstein. I mean, got all sorts of shit coming. Looking forward to bringing you more, and I love you all.

“But here's the thing. Bachelors fans hated him. If I could press a button and rewind it all,”

I would. That's when his life took a disturbing turn. A one night stand would end in a courtroom. The media is here. This case has gone viral. The dating contract. A great date meeting, but I'm also doing you. This is unlike anything I've ever seen before. I'm Stephanie Young. Listen to the love trapped on the iHeart Radio app, Apple Podcasts, or wherever you get your podcasts. Next Monday, our 2026 iHeart Podcast Awards are happening

live in South by Southwest. This is the biggest night in Pod Pastig. We'll honor the very best in podcasting from the past year and celebrate the most innovative talent and creators in the industry. And the winner is. Creativity, knowledge, and passion will all be unfold this play. Thank you so much. I heart rate you all. Thank you to all the other nominees. You guys are awesome. Watch live next Monday at 8 p.m. Eastern 5 p.m. Pacific Free at feeps.com or the Veeps app.

I'm Amanda Knox, and in the new podcast doubt, the case of Lucy Letby. We unpack the story of

“an unimaginable tragedy that gripped the UK in 2023. But what if we didn't get the whole story?”

Adam has been face-of-face. The moment you look at the whole picture of the case, Colach. What if the truth was disguised by a story we chose to believe? Oh my god, I think she might be innocent. Listen to doubt the case of Lucy Letby on the iHeart Radio app. Apple podcasts or wherever you get your podcasts.