typo: Idirans
51 karma · joined March 28, 2024
- regular exercise has incredible benefits for the body+ mind (and the attitude that directs it). Biggest impact of everything on this list.
- Side projects that involve actual doing and not just study. e.g. I spent some money on gear for embedded development and am doing things that involve physical things and using my hands and making gadgets … phone is out of the picture while in the lab.
- Ironically, using LLMs for reviewing and refreshing knowledge you once had but now has gaps is amazing. I spend a bunch of my phone time now having in-depth chats where I know what I’m talking about to a large degree, but the LLM is helping me fill in gaps and then quizzing me on concepts and I know that the things it’s telling me are solid due to my background, then I go check, etc. A really good way to do super focused study to reload a field back into your brain. Might as well take advantage of the fact that they stole all of the world books.
- Write things down! After reviewing, do some problems with pencil and pad. After studying, doing a problem on pencil and paper is actually daunting, but then grooving through a few problems actually makes you realize you know the stuff again! And using an expensive Ampad notebook and nice mech pencil is a great sensory experience.
That’s what I call a load-bearing “if”.
I do not trust OpenAI or other hyperscalars to do this responsibly; and IMO it will be very difficult for government-led efforts not to result in a technocracy where a cabal of AI companies are pulling the strings. Dark times lie ahead, especially when you consider the shrinkage of true source material on the internet and the stranglehold these companies will have on information; and these AI CEOs to me are reminiscent of 19th century robber barons, none seem trustworthy.
To me, this was irritating. True competency and things that inspire real awe encapsulate “res ipsa loquitur” — they speak for themselves. Having some internet influencer try to hype me into getting awed, and implying that “we all” are feeling a certain way as she channels our collective zeitgeist is tiresome.
And personally, IMO although the mission was nice, it wasn’t groundbreaking technically or particularly awe-inspiring.
Ironically, I left feeling a tiny bit disappointed: if everyone is truly thinking this mission is the height of awesomeness or competency, we have a low-ish bar.
I bet that when the old-timers with their starched white shirts, pocket protectors, and horn-rimmed glasses that did the 60s missions got together to watch 2026 Artemis they privately had a good laugh about how little state-of-the-art has progressed.
But the much more interesting question to me: as LLM coding becomes the norm, does it drive the cost of self or small-company generated software to 0?
Like many SW architects/engineers my not-so-developed work-in-retirement plan is to assemble a small team of people I’ve loved working with over the years, start an LLC, and try to make a reasonable (not posh) living doing what we love: making software to solve problems.
On the one hand, it’s clear LLM coding can accelerate and amplify our efforts, but alternately there’s many people claiming there’s no possibility of a moat, your solution/innovation can be cloned in a matter of days … ie. the value of your software is exactly 0.
Not sure which future will be closer to reality. A backup plan that seems reasonable in the 0-value case is to focus our effort on creating actual physical gadgets and systems in the embedded realm, which conceivably can be designed and prototyped by a small team… It seems like these would still be valuable.
The core of the article is “ AI-assisted development potentially short-circuits this replenishment mechanism. If new engineers can generate working modifications without developing deep comprehension, they never form the tacit knowledge that would traditionally accumulate. The organization loses knowledge not just through attrition but through insufficient formation.”
But is it possible this phenomenon is transient?
Isn’t part of the presumed value add of LLM coding agents in the meta-realm around coding; e.g. that well-structured human+LLM generated code (green field in particular) will be organized in such a way that the human will not have to develop deep comprehension until needed (e.g. for bug fix/optimization) and then only for a working set of the code, with the LLM bringing the person up to speed on the working set in question and also providing the architectural context to frame the working set properly?
Fair point, but my hope is that the creativity involved in deciding what to build, with the choice informed by engineering experience (the project/value will not be obvious to everyone) will allow differentiation.
As someone who’s always wanted to “get home and code something on my own”, I do have a glimmer of hope that I wonder if others share. I’ve worked extensively with Claude and there’s no question I am now a high velocity “builder” and my broad experience has some value here. I am sad that I won’t be able to deeply look at all the code I am producing, but I am making sure the LLM and I structure things so that I could eventually dig in to modules if needed (unlikely to happen I suppose).
Anyway, my hope/question: if I embrace my new role as fast system builder and I am creative in producing systems that solve real problems “first”, is there a path to making that a career (I.e. 4 friends and I cranking out real production software that’s filling a real niche)? There must be some way for this to succeed —- I am not yet buying the “everything will be instantly copyable and so any solution is instantly commodity” argument. If that’s true, then there is no hope. I am still in shape, though, so going pro in pickleball is always an option, ha ha.
https://qz.com/emails/space-business/2172377/an-oxford-case-...
“… to have and to hold from this day forward, for better, for worse, for richer, for poorer, in sickness and in health, to love and to cherish, until I feel like this is done and want to move on. And done is when I say it’s done.”
There won’t be a dry eye in the house!
If your Rust project leans heavily on unsafe code and/or many libraries that use lots of unsafe, then aren’t you fooling yourself to some degree; i.e. trusting that the unsafe code you write or that written by the 10 other people who wrote the unsafe libs you’re using is ok? Seems like that tosses some cold water on the warm afterglow.
SIX? Um, how about we start with, like, one?
That aside, a concise article with good advice IMO, but I would add “find a partner and be accountable”, especially for eliminating addictive / tempting bad habits or replacing them with good ones.
“creating order out of chaos (or reverse if needed)”
The heavens declare the glory of God; the skies proclaim the work of his hands. Day after day they pour forth speech; night after night they reveal knowledge. They have no speech, they use no words; no sound is heard from them. Yet their voice goes out into all the earth, their words to the ends of the world.