jugg1es

"The fact that an LLM now writes the code does not mean any abstractions we made before are suddenly less important or less useful." - I think maybe it does, we just don't know it yet.

pretty sure its a sex thing - makes sense for females to lift up their rear and I guess there isn't any evolutionary pressure for that sensitivity to not exist in males as well.

"While I was pacing the frontier, I discovered some load-bearing fence posts that I should have surfaced earlier."

I'd probably amend this that we do live in a meritocracy, but the 'merit' part applies to your ability to navigate the system - not your ability to produce good outcomes.

especially for directories

The statement was in reference to the players in the US healthcare system: payers, ACOs, MCOs, providers, suppliers, SNFs, third parties, etc... It was not in reference to individuals. Most individuals in the healthcare system are decidedly not evil.

I've worked in the healthcare space for a decade and I have asked some tough questions of my leadership and I got a response I'll never forget: "Everyone in healthcare is a little bit evil"

kitten mittens

The problem with tech debt is not that it is some poorly designed code in a few repositories that can just be changed. True tech debt is the kind that requires significant architectural changes across many systems and is almost always coupled with major data migrations. You need the rest of the business to agree that you want to invest all that time and energy to fix a problem someone else created 10 years ago. You likely will also need other teams to set aside time on their own road map to address it. You also might need customers to change what they are doing because if software lets you do something, you can guarantee that someone has learned to do it - even if that 'something' was actually a bug.

LLMs don't solve any of those problems by itself.

I think veteran engineers have always known that the real problems with velocity have always been more organizational than technical. The inability for the business to define a focused, productive roadmap has always been the problem in software engineering. Constantly jumping to the next shiny thing that yields almost no ROI but never allowing systemic tech debt to be addressed has crippled many company's I have worked at in the long-term.

I want this question to have an interesting answer, but everyone knows that if this question ever goes to the courts, ownership will go to the people in charge with the money. The idea that Anthropic may not own Claude Code just because Claude wrote it is wishful thinking.

thats an interesting take on python. I think I might agree with you

this is exactly what I mean though. Instead of the community building a better tool that we collectively contribute to and work with, genAI is going to silo all the good stuff with individual developers and teams instead. Because its so cheap to create these tools, no one is going to bother publishing new ones for everyone, so we will essentially be stuck with what we have forever now.

I've been worried for some time now that genAI will effectively kill the market for dev tools and so we will be stuck with our current dev tools for a long time. If everyone is using LLMs to write code, the only dev tools anyone will use will be the ones that the LLMs use. We will be stuck with NPM forever.

You are overstating or overgeneralizing the strength of psychedelics as a class of drug. Most people who take them are not taking enough to produce a PTSD-level response.

I developed PTSD after my finding my 3yo son floating in a pool face down (I luckily saved and revived him - he's fine now) and it would take a very intense psychedelic experience to come anywhere close to that kind of emotional content.

Claiming the entire class of drugs are a potent cause of PTSD rings of reefer madness propaganda to me.