Ecys

i meant on a higher, agentic level where the AI's code is infallible. and that's going to happen very soon:

say: human wants to make a search engine that money for them.

1. for a task, ask several agents to make their own implementation and a super agent to evaluate each one and interrogate each agent and find the best implementation/variable names, and then explain to the human what exactly it does. or just mythos

2. the feature is something like "let videos be in search results, along with links"

3. human's job "is it worth putting videos in this search engine? will it really drive profits higher? i guess people will stay on teh search engine longer, but hmmm maybe not. maybe let's do some a/b testing and see whether it's worth implementing???" etc...

this is where the developer has to start thinking like a product manager. meaning his position is abolished and the product manager can do the "coding" part directly.

now this should be basic knowledge in 2026. i am just reading and writing back the same thing on HN omds.

Grok agrees with you. I really don't understand this.

https://grok.com/share/bGVnYWN5_abc82dc6-7a1f-436e-9ec6-3d96...

I don't find this move by Google hostile at all. Maybe because I was on Linux and wasn't affected the same way- I had to install it as a separate 2.0 application (all old AGY things are still there).

It just feels like they released a new product to me and calling it hostile or bait-and-switch seems ungrateful.

this is actually precisely what humans' roles will be.

"is this implementation/code actually aligned with what i want to do?"

humanic responsibility's focus will move entirely from implementing code to deciding whether it should be implemented or not.

u probably mean unsolved as in "not yet able to be automated", and that's true.

if pull-request checks verifying that tests are conforming to the spec are automated, then we'd have AGI.

very true. and we already know and agree with this.

user experience/what the app actually does >>> actually implementing it.

elon musk said this a looong time ago. we move from layer 1 (coding, how do we implement this?) to layer 2 thinking (what should the code do? what do we code? should we implement this? (what to code to get the most money?))

this is basic knowledge

palantir is not just google earth with flight maps and conflict zones..........

AI is a powerful multiplier for people who already have deep technical expertise. The people seeing the biggest wins with AI are already highly skilled.

This sentiment will stray further from the truth as time goes on.

Sure, it's a multiplier for those who are already skilled, but for those who are unskilled, it is capable of taking you from 0 -> 1+.

The ones currently benefiting from AI are the ones who (i) have a general understanding of how an AI works and experience with using it and (ii) have a very generic understanding of what it is they're trying to do (programming, most likely) and know the limits of their tools, but don't know how to actually do anything meaningful.

The whole point of AI is to open the door of complexity to normies; they are the ones benefiting most from it. For a skilled developer, it may make a 1hr task -> 5 mins; for a normie, it makes something which was utterly impossible into -> now within his reality to achieve. the difference for normies is just more life-changing.

If you think of skilled developers as the ceiling and normies as the floor, AI raises the floor higher by giving normies more capability, which makes the ceiling seem less impressive. But eventually the floor will surpass the ceiling, and then it'll be a matter of who can operate AI better/how good AI is.

it was written by AI. search up speed reading. you can double or triple your reading speed in a day.

Lol. https://x.com/Marakath/status/2056341063342633336

Everything that's not AI is just irrelevant. AI is diverse enough to replace the other things you'd talk about.