Feed

Code remains cheap, unless it needs to be secure. Even if costs go down as inference optimizations, unless models reach the point of diminishing security returns, you still need to buy more tokens than attackers do. The cost is fixed by the market value of an exploit.

What matters here is a narrower point. The center is not biased towards novelty so much as towards contact with the thing that creates potential change. The middle ground is not between use and non-use, but between refusal and commitment and the people in the center will often look more like adopters than skeptics, not because they have already made up their minds, but because getting an informed view requires exploration.

I think we’re going to see a lot more reimaginings, where people attack old problems with modern tactics. Coding agents lower the costs of taking on stalwarts and raise our ability to rapidly harden our software. I can think of many software tools that people rely on but don’t like. Those are the prime targets for reimagining.

Satoshi revealed? seems plausible to me.

I recalled how 10 years before, Satoshi had come out of hiding to help Mr. Back win the war over block size. And here Satoshi was, back again in a luxury hotel in El Salvador. Only this time, he had served Mr. Back less well because he’d removed any lingering doubt in my mind that I had the right man.

The evolution of the English language is fascinating to me. When I look at old english its hard to believe the language we speak to day used to sound that way.

In the Beowulf, the dual makes a dramatic appearance: two warriors swim in the sea holding swords, "to defend the two of us against whales" ("wit unc wið hronfixas werian" in the original). Thought to be written in the 8th Century, Beowulf is the earliest European epic written in the vernacular – the language commonly spoken – rather than a high culture, or literary language.

This certainly describes the primary way I use AI agents.

There is only one source of feedback that moves at the speed of AI-generated code: yourself. You're there to prompt, you're there to review. You don't need to recruit testers, run surveys, or manage design partners. You just build what you want, and use what you build.

And that's what many developers are doing with cheap code: building idiosyncratic tools for ourselves, guided by our passions, taste, and needs.

We must return to the fundamental truth The source code is not the product. The product is the Outcome the user achieves. The code is merely the expensive, high-maintenance machinery required to deliver that outcome. If you can deliver a $1,000,000 outcome with 10 lines of code, you are a hero. If you deliver that same outcome with 37,000 lines, you have just created a $1,000,000 liability.

And I would like to suggest that slowing the fuck down is the way to go. Give yourself time to think about what you're actually building and why. Give yourself an opportunity to say, fuck no, we don't need this. Set yourself limits on how much code you let the clanker generate per day, in line with your ability to actually review the code.

Instead, the art moved from capturing images to choosing them. From the shutter finger to the editing eye. From “can I get the shot?” to “can I find the shot, in all of this, and do I know it when I see it?” The technical act got cheap. The judgment got more valuable. And an entire universe of new things that nobody predicted, things that couldn’t have existed in the era of 36 exposures, grew in the space that opened up.

I think that’s what’s happening now. With slides, with code, with writing, with design, with whatever domain you’re generating abundance in. The raw material is becoming infinite. The craft is migrating somewhere else.

I think this all makes sense for someone in the author's situation of which I am one. It should be remembered that there probably weren't many impoverished homeless people interviewed on their death beds. I'm assuming some of those would have had regrets about not earning enough money. My point is that even though people like me may be worrying about things like identity crisis, AI agents could have more tangible consequences for some.

Saying "I am a software engineer" is beginning to feel like saying "I am a calcultor" in 1950 now that digital machines can use electrical circuits to count, add, multiply - it's not long until they'll be able differentiate a non-continuous function... You're beginning to feel less-than-useful.

This bothers a lot of people for a reason (I think) that has nothing to do with the technology. The fear isn't really about losing a job title, it's about losing the story you tell yourself about who you are.