TL;DR
Get the latest gadgets delivered free with Prime
- Fast, free delivery on millions of items
- Prime Video, Amazon Music and more included
- Member-only deals all year
Karri Saarinen, co-founder and CEO of Linear, argues that good software reflects the judgment and experience of the people who make it. In an essay, he warns that AI agents may speed up feature production while making products less coherent if teams do not share a clear perspective.
Karri Saarinen, co-founder and CEO of software company Linear, argues that products risk losing coherence as AI agents make software development easier. In an essay titled “Someone behind the software,” he says a product’s character comes from its makers’ experience, judgment and choices—not simply from the features they can produce.
Saarinen challenges the idea that software is the output of a repeatable factory process: gather requirements, build features and measure results. Two teams can speak with similar customers and use the same technology yet make different products, he writes, because they interpret what they learn differently and bring distinct approaches to building. A company’s founders and organizational culture also shape those decisions.
He describes Linear’s approach as valuing intuition over process or data, while distinguishing that from making choices on unexamined preference. In his account, intuition is formed through work, customer conversations and mistakes. Linear spoke with people in different companies and roles before launch, he says, and those conversations helped the team refine its understanding beyond its own frustrations.
A product’s character, Saarinen writes, also depends on what its makers choose not to build and what they keep improving after a feature already works. Individual features can function correctly yet make the overall product worse if they do not fit together. That judgment requires a view of what the product is meant to be, as well as continued contact with customers to check whether decisions were right.
AI Speed Tests Product Coherence
The essay addresses a concern for software teams adopting AI development agents: faster production does not automatically lead to better products. Saarinen’s argument is that agents can help generate changes, but the product still needs people to decide which changes belong and how they support its central purpose.
That distinction matters to users because adding capabilities can increase complexity without improving the core task a product is meant to solve. Saarinen says he sees products becoming messier, including products from successful companies, as technology makes it easier to add features than to rethink existing ones. This is his assessment, not a measured industry-wide finding.
For companies, the issue is also organizational. If people or agent-assisted teams make changes independently, each contribution may make sense on its own while the combined experience becomes inconsistent. Saarinen’s proposed remedy is not to reject automation, but to use the time it creates for deeper understanding and deliberate product decisions.
AI-assisted software development tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Linear’s Stated Product Philosophy
Saarinen grounds the argument in Linear’s own history. Before the product launched, he says, its team interviewed people across organizations and roles about how they worked. Those conversations supplemented the founders’ own experience and helped shape what the company considered important.
He presents judgment informed by experience as different from hiding behind data or process. Data and customer feedback remain part of the picture in his account; the point is that someone must interpret them and take responsibility for product choices. The essay offers a founder’s perspective on product development, rather than independent research into how AI tools are affecting software quality.
Saarinen contrasts deliberate shaping with a pattern he describes as mostly additive: new capabilities accumulate, while the product’s basic form receives less attention. He uses the image of a sculpture to argue for continued refinement, rather than treating each functioning feature as a reason to stop revisiting the whole.
“Good products carry something of the people who make them.”
— Karri Saarinen, Linear co-founder and CEO
product management and coherence software
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Evidence Behind the Industry Critique
The essay does not identify specific products Saarinen considers messy, provide examples of changes that harmed a product, or quantify how frequently this is happening. His observations are presented as personal judgments, and the source material does not include responses from other software makers or users.
It is also unclear how much of the pattern he describes is caused by AI agents, rather than broader incentives to ship features, team structure or other pressures. Saarinen raises agent-assisted work as a possible contributor, but does not provide comparative evidence showing that agents have made products less coherent. He does not specify which practices or measures would show that a product has retained its character.
software feature prioritization tools
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
How Teams Apply the Argument
The essay sets out a point of view, not a product announcement or a formal plan for changes at Linear. Saarinen’s argument points toward teams spending more time understanding customer problems, deciding how features fit the whole product and revisiting choices after launch. He also calls for makers to use the increased ease of software production to shape ideas more deeply.
The source material does not announce new Linear policies, tools or milestones, and it does not say how the company will assess whether its product remains coherent. The next development is therefore practical rather than scheduled: whether software teams using agents make room for shared product judgment alongside faster implementation.
customer feedback analysis software
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
Key Questions
Who wrote “Someone behind the software”?
Karri Saarinen, co-founder and CEO of Linear, wrote the essay. He reflects on how makers’ experience and decisions shape the character of software products.
What is Saarinen’s main argument?
He argues that products need a coherent point of view formed through experience, customer understanding and deliberate choices. Features can work individually but still weaken the overall product if they do not fit together.
Does the essay say AI agents make software worse?
No. Saarinen says agents make it easier to produce changes and raises the possibility that independently generated work can dilute a product’s direction. He does not present data proving that AI agents have made software quality worse.
What does Saarinen mean by valuing intuition over data?
He describes intuition as judgment built through experience, customer conversations and mistakes—not as a substitute for thought or evidence. In his view, people still have to interpret what they learn and take responsibility for product decisions.
Does the essay announce changes at Linear?
No. The source material contains no new product launch, policy or scheduled milestone. It presents Saarinen’s views on software-making and the role of product judgment as automation expands.
Source: hn
Halloween Picks
halloween
As an affiliate, we earn on qualifying purchases.
