What about starting with no venture capitalist, growing from small, setting up a sustainable business, and not play the enshittifying game? Would that be more, or less real?

Great idea, great pricing. I'm not a macos user and we use a custom CI. I'd like to build something homemade for my case.

Are we talking about the extreme right wing guy once again?

I'd say yes. If Hacker News is free, it makes no sense to have "ads" to buy news subscriptions. I won't buy a subscription for ALL the paywalled sites: NYTimes, Atlantic, Bloomberg, whatever. If it's posted here it's either free to read or useless

Baker. Very phisical job, night hours, but it's creative and you really make something with your hands. Wonderful.

This is an unsaid truth! So many bosses and product owners waste money, purpose and skill, and it doesn't really matter how hard you create features and work like crazy, when hire too much, spend on wrong things, enshittify the product or do the wrong acquisition.

Aaahahaha I've never seen a more toxic advice. Go faster! The world will be more alive! It's like putting yourself on cocaine. Grow expectations from you into people, that you'll never be able to sustain! Burn yourself on the altar of productivity! People will like you more at work! When you will die you will be remembered as the fastest guy in the office! The one who made a lot of mistakes but kept the company afloat by doing so much unpaid overwork that capital could flow free to the owner of the business! For no gain than self validation!

I used to share a similar sentiment about speed, especially after having burned out hard around 30. But after recovering, I think I may have overcorrected. Momentum is very powerful, and it's hard to gain momentum at low speed.

Speed is important but going fast doesn't mean going as fast as possible. It's about going fast sustainably. Work speed isn't binary. You can be fast without being the fastest.

The speed that's between "slow" and "fast" is called normal, and far too many companies, people and leaders deeply believe normal counts as slow.

This one's almost as good as "why don't we try paying software engineers by the line?"

Yes. It's a brillant [1] idea to apply metrics like that to people with university level training in optimization!

[1] https://thedailywtf.com/articles/The_Brillant_Paula_Bean

If your alternative meaning of life is harnessing as many feel good chemicals in your brain as possible, that’s an objectively pointless existence

If we’re all just particles and fields, we might as well be as thermodynamically productive as possible

Who says that burning more fuel is a good goal? Productivity is a tool for people in charge to make you feel like you lack something and you have to burn to be valued. Get some therapy instead: all that stuff is toxic and unneeded. Feel free to burn your lives to capitalism and big tech, for no gain

You have to look a level deeper. Life has always been productive, it’s the only way you maintain negative entropy and thus life itself. If you found a species that stopped being biologically productive, you would recognize that as a maladaptive deviation from the norm (and that species would quickly go extinct).

You should work hard to be productive for humanity, not owners, who themselves are also subject to their own biological drives and pressures that channel them just like these same drives channel others.

If you feel exploited, then be productive in ways that circumvent your exploitation. Working hard and being productive is far older and more fundamental that capitalism though, and for your own sake and humanity’s sake you should embrace it.

Your definition of good doesn't apply to me. The more "productive ways" are to me, actually non-factive. Like, contemplation, art for art sake, playing, meditating. And this comes from reduced time spent on producing material things. So going faster and doing more to me is a dis-value. Life is not measured with negative entropy. Life is not measured, not quantitative.

Does he really have to post on X? I deleted that stuff years ago, now.

Only Juniors can think that. You can "vibe code" with Rust? And who is doing the reviews? Verifying requisites, performance, security? You must know the language very well to have a senior level.

Agreed. There's no way someone can vibe code production-quality code today...

Interestingly as AI models are becoming "more competent" I'm finding more and more issues with AI generated code in the project I work on...

Whenever AI is used by a more junior dev (or a senior dev who simply can't be assed) you always find strange patterns which a senior would never have done...

Typically the code works, but there might be subtle security issues or just unusual coding patterns where it appears an LLM has written slop, and instead of taking a step back and reconsidering its approach when errors crop up, LLMs tend to just add layers of complexity to patch over its slop.

These problems obviously compound if left unchecked.

I actually prefer how things were last year when coding models were less competent because at least if a problem was hard enough they'd get nowhere. Today they're good enough to keep hacking until the slop it writes is just about working.

In regards to OPs question though, I suspect there's less point in playing around with different technologies to get some basic understanding of how they work today (LLMs can do this). But if you want to be able to guide LLMs towards good solutions and ensure the code being produced in the era of AI is good, then having engineers with a deep understanding of the technologies they're using is very important.