> Now, in many cases, LLMs can handle the "how" for you. You describe what you want in plain language, and the system works like a programmer or system analyst: breaking your problem into building blocks, mapping a flow to solve it, and creating the first version.
People keep saying things like this, but what's an actual example of a viable product created that way? Talk is cheap, I want to see it.
The problem probably more often just is that the product/vision itself is not as good as it is sold to shareholders. No PM will like to push back on this, so they're stuck with things like optimizing the landing page because "clearly the business vision is flawless, it must be that users don't understand it correctly".
Nice idea, but this approach
does not handle out of vocabulary words well which is one major motivation for using a vector-based search. It might not perform significantly better compared to lexical matching like tf-idf or BM25, and being slower because of linear complexity. But cool regardless.
MCP is practically useful, but the total lack of security in its "design" for me just underlines the type of YOLO-driven development and lack of quality that's being marketed as productivity improvement in software engineering too often these days.
In your comments history someone replied to a job posting "Just an FYI, if you do a takehome project for William, he won't respond to you (not even with an auto reject)."
I predict Bluesky will add some form of targeted advertisements in the future once the user base has grown to a certain size. Isn't that obvious? I'd assume that's also why investors are willing to invest.