0x445442

I think both of you could be correct based on a whole host of qualifiers like current SDLC landscape, specific business domain, current delivery pipelines, etc.

Flour.

That was documented in the movie Office Space.

However the kernel differences between Linux and BeOS/NewOS are really part and parcel of Be/Haiku. It's like running Smalltalk in the terminal.

Yeah the social media giants cribbed Lifestreams sort of with the timeline but without the search capabilities that were a cornerstone of the paper. You can see glimpses of this metaphor elsewhere with email, rss and news readers but it would be interesting to make that the centralized metaphor of an entire system for all the system's data.

If something is task-specific (well understood) wouldn't this be a good candidate for a computer program?

Just tell the clanker to read the api documentation that should already exist. You dont need an MCP server for that.

What interactions with internal tools? If you can answer that question then the clankers can help you write a deterministic program for that same interaction and you only spend the tokens once.

MCPs are a bad idea because they encourage token burn at runtime when a deterministic program that uses the API should be used.

Of course Mario, Sammy, Jensen et al. would be for this.

I'm old enough to remember the OpenAPI spec.

I don't know if it's even OK for a cop to just randomly watch a random street corner without a specific reason to do so. If a cop was following a given person around all day every day without probable cause would this not be considered harassment? If we view the Flock Camera network as a single system is this not harassment?

This is what I've been mulling over for months. Surely there's a better, more rigorous specification format than Markdown prose that already exists in the industry and is useful to the agents. Formal Use Cases perhaps? Probably not Gherkin but maybe some other spec DSL.

I agree with this but what I've been trying to answer the last few months is if there was an optimal language for the spec. As with you, I don't think it's English Markdown, but I don't think it's Java either. I also don't think it's Gherkin, Lisp perhaps? I'm still searching.

Upper management material right there.

Result<T> { String resultCode; T data; List<String> errors; }

The Architects you're describing aren't reviewing the code and making suggestions for changes so your comparing apples and oranges. What I'm describing is more of a team lead to team members relationship.

I realized recently the LLMs are calling bullshit on the moniker of engineer or programmer that I've bestowed on myself over the course of my career. The current LLMs are making it quite easy to seperate software design from implementation. I used to be firmly in the camp that one really needed to roll up their sleves, sit down with an editor and start banging away until the software evolved and coalesced around a solution.

I convinced myself that functional specs and detailed design documents were not needed because they wouldn't be kept in sync with the code. But the LLMs are essentially turning the synthesis of the code from those documents to a compilation step of sorts.

Now I must ponder the question, what portions of the acts of coding, designing and delivering a working product were the portions that bring me joy. I've been attempting to answer this question by making a concerted effort to delegate the coding to the LLMs and reviewing if the code conforms to the designs I've written down. This process is much closer to the historical engineering disciplines but I have to say, its not been easy.

My advice to the the more junior reading this. Experiment with different functional and design spec formats that best serve the LLMs and develop the skill of writing these and then managing the LLMs.

TLDR, the LLMs are giving the term Software Engineering actual meaning.

The creator of Wikipedia disagrees with you.

https://larrysanger.org/2025/08/on-the-cybersecurity-subcomm...

And Peter Thiel is anagram for The Reptile.

My guess is higher run totals.

I find this dubious since the effect she was describing is caused by resonance frequency. Since, in the example provided, the source is an amplified speaker pushing air in both cases the outcome should be the same. The more famous test of this principle is the breaking of a glass and I would be surprised if this hadn't been done with digital signal inputs.

We used to have a very nice option called Blackberry. Oh how I miss those phones.

Dozens of microservices, oh one should be so lucky. Try hundreds where the complexity of the whole system rises non-linerarly as a function of each microservice.

There is good content on the site. But it's nearly impossible to get in a convenient way with the UI options. I've glanced at their APIs and it looks possible to build some clients that presented only what you wanted in a chronological order, filterable by accounts but it would take work.

30 seconds for 100 files sounds horrible. Was this time including tests?

Keyboard typing speed and compile times aren't really the bottle neck for the overwhelming majority of software engineers. For them these times are dwarfed by the time it takes Service Now access tickets to get fulfilled.

Oh, the typical ones, like all this type checking is stifling and slowing me down.

Weak/Dynamic vs. Strong/Static typing.

I used to complain about the latter then I grew up.

Are individual agents deployable on their own or does the entire "app" of agents need to be deployed as a single group? If individually deployable, what does this look like from a version control and a CI/CD perspective?