MarkLowenstein

This. This is the real phenomenon of the AI-assisted development decade.

People who became programmers because they are naturally motivated by the craft, are now "unproductive" unless they dispense with their beloved crafting activities forever. What are they going to do? Voluntary buyouts for starters.

But then who will be left? What kind of software will they provide?

Every Mormon house I go to is crawling with guests. Family friends, relatives, neighbors. Watching a game, cooking dinner, doing a construction project together, kids in a Nerf-gun war. Most other houses/apartments I go to are sterile, cold, and lonely. That difference is why.

My gut tells me that exploring mathematics in this way has very high potential for bringing on future advancements. (1) Simple elements that (2) reveal coherent structures, and were (3) hidden to historic geniuses due to requiring exhaustive computation.

Made-up term. Like an alpha male or apex predator, the kind that are 10x and companies are often created around.

Real question: is there anybody that is both maintaining alpha-dev capability by keeping abreast of all these daily changes, while also reserving enough time to actually work?

Seems like we've reached the event horizon of whether AI advances are worth paying attention to.

Surprised no one here just does the outside border and spirals in (pinching off and immediately finishing irregular bulges). Looks neat, though more organic than rows, and is naturally motivating, as the second "half" always seems to go much quicker. Spiral the other way next time for evenness.

It will continue to be a mystery only solvable by the dwindling number of people clever enough to combat the problem with strategies like the many offered here.

Until the real problem is identified...which IMO is that programming itself is just harder to concentrate on in 2026 than it was in 1989. There are way too many possibilities of how to do things, and way too much difference between a good choice (say getting Claude to do it) and a bad one (say, writing a linked-list traverser yourself). Humans work well with the few variables involved in creating things like that linked-list traverser. But they require tons more energy if everything is on the table. Right library? Right platform? Right coding agent? Right way to keep myself from getting distracted?

In contrast, doing almost anything else seems like a relief for your brain.

My suggestion is always to look at what colors people think "go together". A Westerner looking at a Chinese temple will say "ugh, saturated red, light blue, and gold, all together?" My own self looking at a shirt my Eastern European wife loves: "dark blue, gray, and orange, bleah". It suggests that depending on your culture, you may have adopted a different visual response, where blood color is harmonious with sky color, or something like that.

YES! "Deletability"

This is the only site I go to without fear of having to wait for page load.

The real trouble is knowing what being heard, means. For me, as long as no one's intending to make this situation better, I'd like to go do other things. How long do I have to stay there pretending to lament that her life is so hard--especially when part of that is because she hates having her problems solved?

I've got a "smart" TV that I didn't want, but that's the only thing they offer in my price range anymore. Maybe 5 years old. Stopped connecting to Wi-Fi, an actual hardware problem. Bricked. Opened the TV, cleaned the contacts and uncreased some wire strip. Has been working ever since. Most people would have thrown it out and bought another. But I'm the bad guy for using incandescent light bulbs.

It's unbelievable that we try so hard to solve this problem even after CRTs are extinct. Every LCD-type screen is easily made to refresh at any rate below its max. If we can't show a 24fps movie at 24fps on our TVs (or smoothly smoothed at 48fps)...what are we doing as a society? It's not like people think TV is an unimportant corner of their lives.

Something about people successful with computers makes them quick to claim something is easy based on the number of steps needed, without regard to the ease of remembering all the arbitrary or sometimes contra-pattern steps required.

The dream never dies, possibly because people remember when class time was supplanted by a movie. Anyone remember "I Am Joe's Heart"? Those movies showed that you could just sit and watch passively like TV, and you'd learn quite a bit, with professional diagrams and animations to help.

Yet your comment is true. Perhaps the difference is that science is inherently interesting because nature is confined to things that are consistent and make sense, while the latest security model for version 3.0 of this-or-that web service protocol, vs. version 2.0, is basically arbitrary and resists effective visual diagramming. Learning software (not computer science) is an exercise in memorizing things that aren't inherently interesting.