We got tired of fixing the same things

Walk into any enterprise IT department and you will find brilliant engineers spending most of their week on work that has a known answer. Unlock the account. Clear the disk. Push the firewall rule. Chase the patch. None of it is hard; all of it is urgent; and collectively it consumes the capacity that should be going into the things only humans can do.

The industry's answer for two decades was runbooks — documentation that told a human which steps to take. That was the wrong abstraction. If the steps are known well enough to write down, they are known well enough to execute.

What changed recently is not that automation became possible; it became trustworthy. Models can now read an ambiguous ticket and classify it correctly. Telemetry is rich enough to verify that a fix actually held. Durable execution engines survive the restart in the middle of a workflow. Put those together with hard guard rails — scoped credentials, blast-radius ceilings, signed audit — and unattended operation stops being reckless.

That is the whole company. Not "AI will replace your team." Rather: your team should spend its time on the 29% of problems that are genuinely interesting, and the other 71% should close itself.