"The fact that an LLM now writes the code does not mean any abstractions we made before are suddenly less important or less useful." - I think maybe it does, we just don't know it yet.
pretty sure its a sex thing - makes sense for females to lift up their rear and I guess there isn't any evolutionary pressure for that sensitivity to not exist in males as well.
The statement was in reference to the players in the US healthcare system: payers, ACOs, MCOs, providers, suppliers, SNFs, third parties, etc... It was not in reference to individuals. Most individuals in the healthcare system are decidedly not evil.
I've worked in the healthcare space for a decade and I have asked some tough questions of my leadership and I got a response I'll never forget: "Everyone in healthcare is a little bit evil"
The problem with tech debt is not that it is some poorly designed code in a few repositories that can just be changed. True tech debt is the kind that requires significant architectural changes across many systems and is almost always coupled with major data migrations. You need the rest of the business to agree that you want to invest all that time and energy to fix a problem someone else created 10 years ago. You likely will also need other teams to set aside time on their own road map to address it. You also might need customers to change what they are doing because if software lets you do something, you can guarantee that someone has learned to do it - even if that 'something' was actually a bug.
I think veteran engineers have always known that the real problems with velocity have always been more organizational than technical. The inability for the business to define a focused, productive roadmap has always been the problem in software engineering. Constantly jumping to the next shiny thing that yields almost no ROI but never allowing systemic tech debt to be addressed has crippled many company's I have worked at in the long-term.
I want this question to have an interesting answer, but everyone knows that if this question ever goes to the courts, ownership will go to the people in charge with the money. The idea that Anthropic may not own Claude Code just because Claude wrote it is wishful thinking.
this is exactly what I mean though. Instead of the community building a better tool that we collectively contribute to and work with, genAI is going to silo all the good stuff with individual developers and teams instead. Because its so cheap to create these tools, no one is going to bother publishing new ones for everyone, so we will essentially be stuck with what we have forever now.
I've been worried for some time now that genAI will effectively kill the market for dev tools and so we will be stuck with our current dev tools for a long time. If everyone is using LLMs to write code, the only dev tools anyone will use will be the ones that the LLMs use. We will be stuck with NPM forever.
You are overstating or overgeneralizing the strength of psychedelics as a class of drug. Most people who take them are not taking enough to produce a PTSD-level response.
I developed PTSD after my finding my 3yo son floating in a pool face down (I luckily saved and revived him - he's fine now) and it would take a very intense psychedelic experience to come anywhere close to that kind of emotional content.
Claiming the entire class of drugs are a potent cause of PTSD rings of reefer madness propaganda to me.
I think there is a misunderstanding about the therapeutic effects of psychedelics. The drugs themselves may alter physical structure in your brain a little bit - but what they really do is temporarily give you a different perspective - they change your point of view. That skewing of perspective is (I believe) where the therapeutic effect from these drugs arises.
If you are deeply curious about these types of drugs, you need to remember that they all wear off eventually. Lots of very smart and happy people have taken these drugs and experienced no harm.
All of the nay-sayers in the comments here are thinking about this from the POV of a person who reached intellectual maturity without LLMs and now use it as a force multiplier, and rightly so.
However, I think that take is too short-sighted and doesn't take into account the effect that these products have on minds that have not yet reached maturity. What happens when you've been using ChatGPT since grade school and have effectively offloaded all the hard stuff to AI through college? Those people won't be using it as a force multiplier - they will be using it to perform basic tasks. Ray-Ban sells glasses now with LLMs built in with a camera and microphone so you can constantly interact with it all day. What happens when everyone has one of these devices and use it for everything?
I think you are looking at this from a too-narrow lens. What happens when people have ChatGPT built into their eyeglasses and they use it for literally everything. Ray-Ban is already selling this as a product.
Boot-camp grads are not self-taught, they went to a boot-camp. Boot-camp people are career opportunists. Nothing wrong with career opportunists, just saying that they are different than a self-taught dev.
setting up your own local mirror is pretty easy. You set your docker to pull from your local network registry and you configure the registry to pull from the public repo if the requested image isn't found.
I have a BS in neurobiology from 2005 and the one lesson I took away and has been reinforced over and over again for me is that we know very little about biology. For example, epigenetics was only just getting talked about when I graduated. We are still only scratching the surface.
This technique didnt work at all for my kids. Having any sort of "safety net" at all seemed to prevent any teachable moments. The most important factor in teaching my kids to ride a bike was how long they spent on the bike trying to ride it. I have three kids, and my youngest is too young to learn, so I have one more chance to test my theories.