2,509 karma · joined March 19, 2011
Anthropic better get this sorted out with a proper product manager and marketing or they risk customers jumping to easier to understand platforms that are good enough.
- There are 12 keys on the piano just repeated - A scale can start on any of those 12 keys - The "home" key of the scale get labels with a roman numeral one, I - The rest of the keys in the scale get roman numerals ii,iii,IV,V,vi,vii - The I,IV,V are all upper case to represent major chords, the lower case for minor chords - Most pop songs use I,IV,V from a scale. In C-major scale, C, F, G major chords. - You can start on any key on the piano and if you play the same sequence of I, IV, V, you'll get the same song, just transposed into a different key. (the scales are slightly different due to even temperament for advanced ears)
So, learn songs by the chord structure first. It is easier to remember and you'll start to recognize patterns in other songs and unlock them faster.
- Understand how to deploy teams of agents effectively to accomplish significant goals
- Learn ECS/Dots in Unity to scale a system to hundreds of thousands of actors
Non Technical:
- Improve people management skills for leading technical teams with a target of helping each person grow in 2026 and level up the team
- Automate more of my personal finances to gain leverage from systems instead of hoping I make good decisions consistently
When those tools created some awful, complex and slow output, only the people who knew HTML could understand why it wasn't working and fix things.
Vibe coding is in a similar place. It demos really well. It can be powerful and allows for quick iteration on ideas. It works, most of the time. Vibe coding can produce some really terrible code that is not well architected and difficult to maintain. It can introduce basic logic errors that are not easily corrected through multiple prompts back to the system.
I don't know if they will ever be capable of creating production quality systems on par with what senior engineers produce or if they will only get incrementally better and remain best for prototypes and testing ideas.
You can only experience the world in one place in real time. Even if you networked a bunch of "experiencers" together to gather real time data from many places at the same time, you would need a way to learn and train on that data in real time that could incorporate all the simultaneous inputs. I don't see that capability happening anytime soon.
The internet doesn't have a clear, simple, micro-payment system that would allow people to reward value, so instead we have an attention based system where the number of likes and followers grants social status and financial opportunity.
At hiring time, they are willing to pay market rate (or some percentage of market rate) to get people in the door. Once you are employed, they don't care anymore and will let excellent people slowly fall behind market compensation with 1% to 2% raises.
When those employees get frustrated and leave for 20% bump in comp, the companies seem fine replacing them with a new hire at market rate. So now, they have a new employee making market rate, they have to train the new employee for months before they are productive and they've taken on the risk of an unknown vs. just giving the existing employee a raise to market rate. It doesn't make sense unless you want to telegraph the message that employees are fungible and you don't really care about people.