ilc

No, it means you have something unique to say.

The bar is there, but it is lower than you expect. If you have a truly unique point of view to express, that brings some value to the table, slots will open up.

And I've spoken at plenty of conferences. :) Not always in the glamour rooms/slots. But... I did have one talk fill a room out the door. That was a talk on a difficult/controversial topic, and by then... I was probably about as expert as they came on the issue.

I didn't start with that though. I just started with a simple point of view talk. And I'd argue the second version of that talk is still one of the best I've given in my life.

No, I put them with lmgtfy. You are being told that your question is easy to research and you didn't do the work, most of the time.

Also heaven forbid, AI can be right. I realize this is a shocker to many here. But AI has use, especially in easy cases.

I think AI clouds the real issues around Junior hiring. Defective companies.

Let's say you hire your great new engineer. Ok, great! Now their value is going to escalate RAPIDLY over the next 2-3 years. And by rapidly, it could be 50-100%. Because someone else will pay that to NOT train a person fresh out of college!

What company hands out raises aggressively enough to stay ahead of that truth? None of them, maybe a MANGA or some other thing. But most don't.

So, managers figure out fresh out of college == training employees for other people, so why bother? The company may not even break even!

That is the REAL catch 22. Not AI. It is how the value of people changes early in their career.

So you can get rooted by the security issues disclosed.

Isn't it a wonderful catch 22?

Thanks. :) And yeah, I skimmed it. I stand by my comment.

To Quote the Page:

Notes Revise and resubmit, Quarterly Journal of Economics

I'd wait for the revision.

The same way I would with a human:

If I thought the service should only be 1000 lines tops:

- Reject due to excess complexity.

If it is a proper solution:

- Use AI to review it, asking it to be VERY critical of the code, and look for spots where human review may be needed, architecture wise, design wise and implementation wise.

- Ask the AI again to do a security review etc.

- Tell the author to break the PR down into human size chunks using git.

Why those things? It's likely some manager is gonna tell me review it anyways. And if so, I want to have a head start, and if there's critical shoot down level issues I can find with an AI quickly. I'd just shut the PR down now.

As in any "security" situation, in this case the security of your codebase and sanity, defense in depth is the answer.

What you take if you use a bad one?

Was. They've been diverging.

Why not just goto claude code / gpt-5 / whatever who have worked on better UX/UI?

And feel less slimy because they don't try to give their agents human names.

Amen.

git revert works better ;)

The first pic shows the slashed 0, which is what I'd expect if there's any chance of confusion.

But in general, aviation is pretty paranoid over this stuff.

Aviation use. They won't allow O and 0 to be valid for the same data.

So there is no need to disambiguate them.

Only mild. They'd be using Arch Linux and Rust.

Why?

I'm 25+ YOE. 9+ YOE in small companies.

Now, I'll drop a line on ya: I've made several million dollars of mistakes, could easily be 8 figures, though I doubt 9.

Do you want to pay for all that learning someone ELSE paid for, or learn it yourself?

Your call.

You are trying to derive emotional value from your job. I did that for a long time.

I don't anymore. I learned it actually made me worse at the job, and didn't allow me to contribute to the things I DEEPLY care about, because I'm actually just pushing work.

It is not an easy lesson. But I'll take the money, and derive my value to society elsewhere. Alot easier that way.

Startups can be for a variety of reasons, not everyone who starts a business wants to make billions. Sometimes they just want to have a nice life doing something they enjoy, find value in, or can just make money at.

Then again, I'm on HN. Show me the Benjamins. ;)

Why do we go to work?

- Sense of value and worth to society? Go volunteer.

- Wanting to help make someone else's dreams come true? Probably not.

- They pay us!

Ummmnnn. I may or may not be a top engineer. But, in large part for most people the big reason is: They get paid.

In my case, it was more: It was a company where we just kept near missing, and it was a very logical fit.

But it was a bad team fit. 100%.

That said, sometimes one has to have a few bad experiences to actually know what good is.

My comment is how I felt.

"Haters gonna hate."

You be you. You will find your people and your place.

It may just be that Anthropic isn't it.

I had a company that was like a white elephant for me for a long time. Got in there, and I will say: It was one of the worst experiences I had in my career.

Not all that glitters is gold, and happiness is often only discovered when it is gone. If you can avoid those two pitfalls in life. You'll do well better than me.

It was nice knowing you Claude / Anthopic.

This type of behavior has a penalty, that penalty is trust. You lost it.

Yes, god forbid people escalate their issues properly so they go to the right people. The thought alone.

I suspect that truly battle tested engineers will go up in value.

I don't think that it lowers the bar there, if anything the bar is far harsher.

If I'm doing normal coding I make X choices per time period, with Y impacts.

With AI X will go up and the Y / X ratio may ALSO go up, so making more decisions of higher leverage!

As an engineer, there's only one reason I don't want to be on customer calls:

Once a customer knows the person who actually builds the product, they will short cut:

- Customer Service

- Product Management

- Any other sane defenses you put in to protect a developer's time.

And just contact me directly.

Then what do I do to get them off of me without losing a customer?

... That is why engineers don't get on support calls.

If I could be "Anon E. Mouse" for the engagement, that'd be fine. But fact is, that's not what happens.

Yes.

The FSF requires assignment so they can re-license the code to whatever new license THEY deem best.

Not the contributors.

A CLA should always be a warning.

Without a hand in it, yeah you might think that. But it is easily 2x the length, and 2-3x the width of my Pulsar X2mini.

I don't think anyone would mistake it for a mouse.

Honestly, you can maintain laptop muscle memory if your hands are not so injured you can't tolerate the laptop.

I use a laptop keyboard every so often. It isn't my 1st choice, but for light work it's fine.