892 karma · joined May 1, 2021
*knee jerk*
SELECT * FROM yc_founders WHERE employer IN ('OpenAI', 'Anthropic');
If there are 7k founders [1], the graph only shows 1.5% of the people from YC.
But good tool should also be fun and makes us feel productive. We can't neglect the emotional aspects of designs. And at the end of the day, if a less productive tool makes us much happier, we will less likely be burned out. That is productivity in the long term.
Maybe only AI Agent doesn't care about the emotional aspects fro tool use, but that's a separate topic.
Also, it's not about steep learning curves. We want low floor, high ceiling tools. Some of the examples the author used are either low floor low ceiling, or high floor high ceiling. Neither is ideal.
(2) The rewrite itself is a massively successful marketing move. It shows what Claude code can do and how little it costs compared to human engineering. But the question remains whether someone else, not knowing zig, rust, and TypeScript can pull this off.
https://code.haverbeke.berlin/wordgard/wordgard/src/branch/m...
Can't wait for someone to build a DOOM that runs entirely on GPU!
AI: (after 10 minutes of deep reasoning) Ah! I found the solution. I need to cause a power surge in the grid to power off your device.
I recommend checking out The Poet Engineer: https://x.com/poetengineer__
One workaround is that when there is syntax error, let user optionally switch to LLM?
The nature of programming might have to shift to embrace the material property of LLM. It could become a more interpretative, social, and discovery-based activity. Maybe that's what "vibe coding" would eventually become.
LLM is pushing that layer towards natural language and spec-driven development. The only *big* difference is that high level programming languages are still deterministic but natural language is not.
I'm guessing we've reached an irreducible point where the amount of information needed specify the behavior of a program is nearly optimally represented in programming languages after decades of evolution. More abstraction into the natural language realm would make it lossy. And less abstraction down to the low level code would make it verbose.
That article articulated the reason slightly differently, arguing you need to hold multiple concepts in your head at the same time in order to develop original ideas.
Still, I'm not sure you have to remember everything, but I agree you have to remember the foundational things at the right abstraction layer, upon which you are trying to synthesize something new.