codyswann

I live about four miles from the plant. I have not grown a second head... yet.

Nothing I haven’t read 1,000 times before.

This doesn't make sense. I think you mean "If you are really good at something, you'll find AI might not be as good as the something you are really good at"

Ask it to take control of a browser using something like Playwright and use the UI itself like an end user would and evaluate whether it is a good experience.

Code isn't the moat and it hasn't been for quite some time. Data is the moat.

It's very problematic for companies, mainly because of the tooling. Large companies are equating lovable, replit, bold, V0 with Claude Code, Codex, etc all under the "Vibe Coding" banner.

I try to fit the former under the banner of "Prompt-to-app Tools" and the latter as "Autonomous AI Engineering"

Alternate headline: "Parents failed to dissuade son from killing himself"

Even if everyone on earth agrees with an opinion, it's still an opinion. There is a material difference between a fact and an opinion.

No. Facts are facts. Opinions are opinions. And statements of fact are unverified facts.

I wish people would start understanding the difference.

"Ice cream is cold" is an opinion.

"Ice cream melts at 50 degrees Fahrenheit" is a statement of fact.

Agreed. If your identity is your ability to bang away on a keyboard writing instructions to a computer in Python (or any other "language"), you're in for a bad time.

If your identity is solving difficult, domain-specific software-based problems, efficiently and securely, it doesn't matter if your instructions are written in English, French or... Python.

Is that a "yes" on lint rules? AI needs determinism to block commits because once the slop hits code review, it's already a gigantic waste of time. AI needs self-correcting loops.

As a manager, I think weekly 1:1s are a waste of time.

As an employee, I think weekly 1:1s are a waste of time.

Man. People complain that JavaScript sucks as a language and then complain when it evolves too quickly to appease these same people.

Oh well.

The Taliban could fend off the West because the West adheres (mostly) to rules of engagement.

A tyrannical government attempting to subjugate its own citizenry would have no such compunction.

They were on the wrong side of a massive bet and lost.

Let's take the reverse and say they were on the right side of the bet and made millions and left everyone else behind to wallow relatively "poor".

Would they feel sorry for those who didn't take the bet?