And shelling out to a cli? That's a pretty damn compelling and composable boundary, IMO.
Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
41–50 of 148 posts
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#42Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#43I feel like these abstractions like "CI might not work well in the era of agentic tooling" are fine for thought-leadership posts but there's so much hands-on work to be done. The last word on AI computer use shouldn't be bash utils that were already feature-complete before MJ recorded Thriller. There is some movement in this direction--there is a new 'gh' subcommand called repo read-file for example, that lets agents…
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#44Stack Overflow conveniently defining the problem in a way that makes SO the answer. The irony is that the kind of code review that LLMs make possible would never have been doable on SO lest you be accused of trying to 'outsource the work'. Now agentic coding produces the full 100 line change, and SO says the real crisis is that nobody has reviewed it properly. SO was fully responsible for creating the culture where n…
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#45An example of this in action is the utter inability to get deepseek v4 flash (even the new version) to stay concise. I have jumped through all sorts of hoops with deterministic checks, pre-message injection hooks, memory framework, etc and when it fails still and I ask why it essentially says "I forgot." This makes it unreliable and preferences are things I need to assume are treated as exactly that, preferences, not…
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#46I have to admit, I asked ChatGPT to do a TLDR summary because I found the writing meandered quite a bit. I think the overall point is sound: > "Developers become attached to tools like Vim, Emacs, or an IDE because years of experience make those tools predictable extensions of their thinking. The attachment is less about features and more about accumulated trust, muscle memory, and a workflow built around known bound…
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#47This article is a bit rambly so I'll just focus on some things from the beginning: >If your kitchen knife kept changing shape, weight, and edge, you’d have to relearn it every time; that’s a hard tool to build trust in. This concept was betrayed far before agentic tools, with a much earlier concept: Automatic updates. To use one product as an example: When Windows ME and Windows Vista came out, people hated them even…
Prior to XP, MS had two lines of Windows: the Windows 9x kernels and the Windows NT kernels. Windows XP was meant to be the merger of the two lines, adapting Windows NT to have compatibility with Windows 95 and Windows 98 features. Unfortunately, Windows XP development went overlong, so MS wedged in Windows ME to give a stop-gap release until XP could actually be released.
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#48[flagged]
Yes that is what happened to SO. They now get practically zero questions, zero answers, zero page views, and zero ad revenue. It is their own fault because they froze everyone out of the site and then once LLMs became an alternative, everyone started asking their questions to LLMs. They are now trying to somehow pivot to AI to make revenue again, starting with Stack Overflow for Agents, and now with wordy vacuous blo…
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#49This article is a bit rambly so I'll just focus on some things from the beginning: >If your kitchen knife kept changing shape, weight, and edge, you’d have to relearn it every time; that’s a hard tool to build trust in. This concept was betrayed far before agentic tools, with a much earlier concept: Automatic updates. To use one product as an example: When Windows ME and Windows Vista came out, people hated them even…
Perhaps this is why users dislike monthly SaaS - they cannot trust stability of the tool, because often the incentives are to keep adding features well past peak utility [ resulting in enshitification ]
Re: Developers are attached to tools because tools encode trust
#50This article is a bit rambly so I'll just focus on some things from the beginning: >If your kitchen knife kept changing shape, weight, and edge, you’d have to relearn it every time; that’s a hard tool to build trust in. This concept was betrayed far before agentic tools, with a much earlier concept: Automatic updates. To use one product as an example: When Windows ME and Windows Vista came out, people hated them even…
A good tool does a job well with minimal side effects and maximal predictability. Perhaps this is why users dislike monthly SaaS - they cannot trust stability of the tool, because often the incentives are to keep adding features well past peak utility [ resulting in enshitification ]