<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8" standalone="yes"?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom">
	<channel>
		<title>Productivity on Dr. Hitesh Sarda</title>
		<link>https://hitesh.in/tags/productivity/</link>
		<description>Recent content in Productivity on Dr. Hitesh Sarda</description>
		<generator>Hugo</generator>
		<language>en-US</language>
		
		
		
		
			<lastBuildDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
			<atom:link href="https://hitesh.in/tags/productivity/index.xml" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
			<item>
				<title>The effort signal</title>
				<link>https://hitesh.in/2026/the-effort-signal/</link>
				<pubDate>Fri, 12 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<guid>https://hitesh.in/2026/the-effort-signal/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;When AI tools landed in most teams, so did a pattern nobody quite had words for: a colleague sends AI-generated output without reviewing it, expecting the group to do the evaluation they skipped. The frustration is real. But the usual framing, &amp;ldquo;show effort when asking for attention,&amp;rdquo; puts the weight on the wrong thing.&lt;/p&gt;&#xA;&lt;p&gt;Tom Bedor articulated the &lt;a href=&#34;https://tombedor.dev/human-attention-and-human-effort/&#34;&gt;rule he now follows&lt;/a&gt; after a colleague forwarded AI analysis they hadn&amp;rsquo;t read and asked him to evaluate it. The rule is sensible. But I think it misidentifies what&amp;rsquo;s actually broken.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
			<item>
				<title>When the AI Passes Every Test and Still Gets It Wrong</title>
				<link>https://hitesh.in/2026/when-ai-passes-every-test-and-still-gets-it-wrong/</link>
				<pubDate>Thu, 11 Jun 2026 00:00:00 +0000</pubDate>
				<guid>https://hitesh.in/2026/when-ai-passes-every-test-and-still-gets-it-wrong/</guid>
				<description>&lt;p&gt;In early March 2026, Amazon&amp;rsquo;s retail site fell over repeatedly, and &lt;a href=&#34;https://oecd.ai/en/incidents/2026-03-10-01aa&#34;&gt;internal documents tied the outages to AI-assisted code changes&lt;/a&gt;. The worst, on March 5, took the site down for about six hours and dropped orders by roughly 99%, an estimated 6.3 million that never happened. A few days earlier, a separate AI-assisted change had quietly started showing customers the wrong delivery dates. That code compiled. It passed review. It shipped.&lt;/p&gt;</description>
			</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
