91–100 of 242 posts
Superpower: AI slop.
I'm sure the horse whip manufacturers had similar things to say about steam powered horses. We just don't think about them much anymore. The whole world is changing around us and nothing is secure. I would not gamble that the market for our engineering careers is safe with so much disruption happening. Tools like Lovable are going to put lots of pressure on technical web designers. Business processes may conform to t…
I often feel these types of blogposts would be more helpful if they demonstrated someone using the tools to build something non-trivial. Is Claude really "learning new skills" when you feed it a book, or does it present it like that because you're prompting encourages that sort of response-behavior. I feel like it has to demo Claude with the new skills and Claude without. Maybe I'm a curmudgeon but most of these type…
Agreed. The methodology needed here is something like an A/B test, with quantifiable metrics that demonstrate the effectiveness of the tool. And to do it not just once, but many times under different scenarios so that it demonstrates statistical significance. The most challenging part when working with coding agents is that they seem to do well initially on a small code base with low complexity. Once the codebase get…
If that's what we need to do, don't we already have the answer to the question?
I am not ashamed to admit this whole agentic coding movement has moved beyond me. Not only do I have know everything about the code, data and domain, but now I need to understand this whole AI system which is a meta skill of its own. I fear I may never be able catch up till someone comes along and simplifies it for pleb consumption.
No matter what you are told, there is no silver bullet. Precisely defining the problem is always the hard part. And the best way to precisely define a problem and its solution is code.
I’ll let other people fight swarms of bots building… well who knows what. Maybe someday it will deliver useful stuff, but I’m highly skeptical.
I am not ashamed to admit this whole agentic coding movement has moved beyond me. Not only do I have know everything about the code, data and domain, but now I need to understand this whole AI system which is a meta skill of its own. I fear I may never be able catch up till someone comes along and simplifies it for pleb consumption.
just remember that it works the same for everyone: you input text, magic happens, text comes out.
if you can properly explain a software engineering problem in plain language, you're an expert in using LLMs. everything on top of that people experimenting or trying to build the next big thing.
The post reads like the someone throwing bones and reading their fortune. That part where Claude did its own journaling was so cringe it was hilarious. The tone of the journal entry was exactly like the blog author, which suggests to me Claude is reflecting back what the author wants to hear. I feel like Jesse is consumed in a tornado of llm sycophancy.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
well explain why OPost is "wild" and what makes you recommend it "strongly" . what have u built with to come to those conclusions ? is this too much to ask.
I recommend it strongly because the "skills" mechanism it describes is a new and very promising technique, and this is the best article I've seen that explains that. It's "wild" because, among many other experiments, Jesse has experimented with giving Claude a "feelings journal" and prompting it using Graphviz DOT diagrams. For my previous writing and work on this you can consult my blog - here's the AI-assisted prog…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Important: there is a lot of human coding, too. I'm not highlighting this to gloat or to prove a point. If anything in the past I have underestimated how big LLMs were going to be. Anyone so inclined can take the chance to point and laugh at how stupid and wrong that was. Done? Great. I don't think I've been intentionally avoiding coding assistants and as a matter of fact I have been using Claude Code since the lit…
Yeah, my current opinion on this is that AI tools make development harder work . You can get big productivity boosts out of them but you have to be working at the top of your game - I often find I'm mentally exhausted after just a couple of hours.
I am not ashamed to admit this whole agentic coding movement has moved beyond me. Not only do I have know everything about the code, data and domain, but now I need to understand this whole AI system which is a meta skill of its own. I fear I may never be able catch up till someone comes along and simplifies it for pleb consumption.
It's also possible to put in enough hours of real coding to get to the point where coding really isn't that hard anymore, at least not hard enough to justify switching from those stable/solid fundamental skills to a constantly revolving ecosystem of ephemeral tools, models, model versions, best practices, lessons from trial and error, etc. Then you could bypass all of this distraction. Admittedly that stance is easie…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
> Important: there is a lot of human coding, too. I'm not highlighting this to gloat or to prove a point. If anything in the past I have underestimated how big LLMs were going to be. Anyone so inclined can take the chance to point and laugh at how stupid and wrong that was. Done? Great. I don't think I've been intentionally avoiding coding assistants and as a matter of fact I have been using Claude Code since the lit…
Yeah, my current opinion on this is that AI tools make development harder work . You can get big productivity boosts out of them but you have to be working at the top of your game - I often find I'm mentally exhausted after just a couple of hours.
When using it for code or architecture or design, I’m always watching for signs that it is going off the rails. Then I usually write code myself for a while, to keep the structure and key details of whatever I’m doing correct.