mat_b

> Some level of randomness in our thought process is almost evolutionarily required to avoid becoming part of the larger super structure, similar to an ant colony.

Not really. Ants are superorganisms, they share more than half of their DNA with each other. You could think of each ant as being like a cell in a human.

What's your point? I can't do anything about that. All I can do is deal with the situation as it is right now and wait to see what happens.

It very much is a skill. You wont get good results by asking it to "go do X" and walking away from the desk. You have to know how to use it as a tool to: 1) research the task 2) develop a plan the agent can follow to complete the task 3) check the plan for completeness/issues

After a (potentially long) session of investigation and planning _then_ you let it code. Even just being aware of this process is part of the skill involved (then you have to actually get used to doing it effectively).

This would only move the needle further in the direction of a terrible user experience. This is exactly what we don't want.

> It’s a real tragedy of the commons

Seems more like a real tragedy of private enterprise.

We used to assume that the surveillance world would be built by government (1984). But it turned out to be equally likely to be built by the free market.

Personally, I do enjoy it still. I'm able to focus more on architecture and the bigger picture now.

It's writing nearly all of the code where I work. It also reviews all of the code (I review it as well). You still have to guide it and hold its hand though. I dont write code by hand anymore (and haven't in almost a year). The job is now about managing the bots, understanding the architecture and keep everything aligned.

What does your prompting look like for step 3 - pressure test the plans?

Except that it's not preventable. Technology is always an arms race. If you don't create it, someone else will, and then they'll have the advantage and subjugate you, so you might as well be the one to do it first. Whatever it is that you're trying to prevent, someone is going to do it if it gives them power.

It's not as simple as that. The supply is being kept low to enrich housing investors.

Exactly how I feel. If I wanted this agent-centric view without being able to easily see the code I would be using Claude Code.

I use Cursor because agents are not ready to be the ones driving. I need to drive. I still need to understand all the code (and easily browse it) and keep a close watch over what the AI is doing.

I did some experimenting recently and I'm quite convinced that when I use Comcasts DNS they are selling it to advertisers. I've switched to 1.1.1.1 simply because it annoys me that Comcast is doing this.

> So, try brainstorming the issue with Claude Code, talk it through so it's on the same page as you, ensure it's done research (web search, docs) to weigh the best solutions, and then enter plan mode so it generates a markdown plan file. From there you can read/review,tweak the plan file. Or have it implement it. Or you implement it.

This is exactly the workflow that works very well for me in Cursor (although I don't use their Plan Mode - I do my version of it). If you know the codebase well this can increase your speed/productivity quite a bit. Not trying to convince naysayers of this, their minds are already made up. Just wanted to chime in that this workflow does actually work very well (been using it for over 6 months).