HN user

dorian-graph

1,252 karma
Posts14
Comments627
View on HN

you assume “the left” (globally!?) is in support of the Ayatollah?

Where did I imply that, justonceokay? And no, I don't think every leftist supports the Ayatollah. Do you think every leftist, globally, doesn't support them?

I was as vague as you were, in referring to leftists. I gave a concrete example of there being confusion about who the bad guys, since you questioned why leftists (or anyone) would be confused.

Let’s face it: the candidates who want to work at Coinbase are as enthusiastic about AI as we are. They, like us, are optimistic about the future of this (and all) technology.

Yet Anthropic didn't want people to use AI as part of interviewing for them.

Who says they are doing that?

The _instead_ was a key word in my comment. I didn’t say, or imply, they weren’t working on replacing other roles with AI.

This hyper-fixation on replacing engineers in writing code is hilarious, and dangerous, to me. Many people, even in tech companies, have no idea how software is built, maintained, and run.

I think instead we should focus on getting rid of managers and product owners.

Another person has commented that you can do this, but it's a little known thing. git-spice automatically manages it for you too.

Like the author, I'd appreciate a stacked PRs approach, integrated with GitHub (unfortunately). E.g. `a → b → c → d` where I have PRs open for `b`, `c` and not yet on `d`, that are "linked" to the jj changes. So 1 change per PR or it could even be multiple. I've lately become a huge fan of git-spice, that just works.

It's maddening, considering their size, and that there are proven other examples out there of versioned change sets and divorcing the commit ID from the content ID.