rkuodys

I think there is negative bias. The counterpoint being that with code you can test input vs output. With foreign language you cannot. Programmed system, either computes what you want or it doesnt. For Spanish you either have a person who can do testing for you. Good practises and cybersec questions matter in programming, but system doing what it is supposed to do (success path) matters more imho.

Isn't that the story of <any> technology? When the coffee machines first came to be, Barista was definitely a better option. However, through the evolution, in many cases today machine does better job than barista.

I think that is the problem with concentrated markets. You can do whatever and younare actually never "punished" by the market. Ie market htpothesis does not work

I'm pretty sure the personality tests are created specifically for the reason that a single person can have fundamentally (or conflicting) beliefs about himself in a matter of minutes. You can say "I am honest person" and the next minute you can say "I never lie" - and both cannot be true for an average person.

What is the point on Musk you are making? The monetary success does not neccesserily correlate to the common good they have created. In case of Musk there is a lot of governement subsidies, lots of market manipulation and false claim s. So not all activieties that bring profit to the richest are good to the rest. And stats on inequality just highlights that trend

I think its somewhat comparable to cutting grass in the cities.

It was manual labour first. Then there were teactors. Now robots join in - does that mean that personel cutting grass is obsolete? No , you need all of them. That means that city becomes nicer.

With software and AI I somehow feel the same will happen. How many features have you skipped just because it would help some niche set of users and PM or Management would not approve the spending. It is low priority. Or bugs that were annoying but financially not bringing much value.

I hope switching some work to AI , some companies will capture opportunity to make software better while others will make the same software cheaper

Isnt' that what old-school software did for many years? It used to take jobs, just not from developers. If you implement software that takes accounting from 10 people to 2, 8 just got fired. If you have Support solution helping one support rep answer 100 requests instead of 20, you just optimised support force by the rate of 1 to 5.

I'm in the boat of SaaS myself, but feel a bit dishonesty from Senior devs complaining about technology stealing jobs. When it was them doing the stealing, it was fine. Now that the tables have turned, it's not technology is bad

My feeling was the same reading. If you give a task to a junior and he wipes out a database in production - it is not a fault of a Junior, it is your own fault that he was able to do it.

Isnt that point kind of the counterpoint to the AI-first narrative. With standard, human driven operations its true about opportunity costs. What we are told is that AI will replace human, essentially saying that opportunity cost becomes cash only. Then the question of why doesnt AI lab start SaaS fully managed by AI becomes ever more interesting. Maybe because it's not that simple. Hence, it's not that easy in other companies as well to just replace devs, engineers and so on with AI

Can I ask you if you consider that AI changes anything about that? Since I'm embarking on the same boat, my dream is a team of AI which supports and ensures business continuity while Im on vacation or "OOO" otherwise.

I am honestly curious about your point on productivity boost. Are you saying that you can write tests at the same speed as AI can? Or is it the point that tests written by AI is of much lower quality that is not worth using them? I am at the role of solo-preneur now and I see a lot of benefit from AI. But then I read posts like yours that experienced devs don't see much value in AI and I start to doubt the things I do. Are they bad quality(possibly) or is it something else going on.

I think it highly depends on your perception on what is your job.

If programmer is only the code-writer - then it is reasonable to agree with the post.

If on the other hand the developer is problem solver - well it just changes what problems you're solving. Somehow I don't see the future where CEO of any respectable company would sit with AI and ask Agent to develop features. You hire people who solves problems for you.

Facing similar issue with monitoring part of executions. What is your solution if I may as - have you taken smth of the shelf and extended to your needs or did you built from the ground up everything?

While it's definitely interesting comparison, I would say the that key thing is that genius is limited in scope. What I mean by that is given any single genius - we might agree that he is one on subject X but not on subject Y.

With AGI it seems that expectation is to cover all the subjects. Which I think is more like god. You either believe it or you don't. Noone have definite proof of its existence or non-existence.

I actually built the app myself. And for one simple reason - recently started learning to better plan my time. Started with paper version, and up to 5 most important task - my personal goal is to have consistency rather than squeeze every minute of every day.

And paper version is great. However, the vacation came and I wasn't really keen on dragging the book everywhere. Additionally i noticed that while planning, I don't really respect my long term goals - so I build an app for that: Simple thing that does several thing: - 1. Keep only 5 slots for most important tasks. - 2. Have calendar view in the same view (like google tasks) to make sure that I havent' forgotten some important meeting - 3. (Unlike google tasks, or clickup) - have short-term and long term goals in the same view , to make sure that every important task is related to long term goal - Bonus: I see stats on how much of important tasks I have completed. Goal is at least 80% avg for 7 days. - Bonus2: I've added my values to make sure that these are not forgotten in other places.

So single view to address todays work and relate it to long term vision. But I believe it depend on what you're optimising for. Dumping things or makeing sure that signal to noise ratio is better.

I'm reading this and kind of stuck on the 4th. I have a printer though not much of 3D designer. How do one get 3D models for parts that is suitable with SparkFun electronics?

How do you protect agains "professionals" abusing the system. So maybe thats not relevant in USA but I see potential in our communities that smaller repair shops or construction contractor would come and use tools disproportionally to their input. That's especially relevant with consummable parts like blades, files, etc

What I see LLMs at this point is simplified input and output solutions with reduced barriers of entry. So application could become more widespread.

Now that I think of it, maybe this AI era is not electricity, but rather GUI - like the time when Jobs(or whoever) figured out and adopted modern GUI on computers allowing more widespread uses of computer

I quite liked the video. Hope you get to launch the product and I could try it out some day.

The only thing that I kept thinking about was - if there is a correction needed- you have to make it fully by hand. Find everything and map. However, if the first try was way off , I would like to enter from "midpoint" a correction that I want. So instead of fixing 50%, I would be left with maybe 10 or 20. Don't know if you get what I mean.

Can I ask you why so many things with N8N is connected over Telegram it seems versus for example slack? Not a user of Telegram so I honestly am curious about this choice

I have similar thoughts and I have come to conclusion that that's the beauty and the curse of this technology. If one relies too much on it - it's gonna be a curse. However, if technology is used with care - it's a beauty. Not only does it keep SWE jobs "secure" - it really helps a lot for those who know what they are doing.

I think in the end AI will be more advanced tool, but a tool nonetheless. Like methodologies and principles, good practises etc. - they only work if you use it with care and added thought and adaptation to your case. DRY it a great principle. But sometimes it's better if you repeat yourself. For one reason or another. And these are the the tradeoffs that human in the loop should be making imho.

For me the question is different- you can ask "how to become better coder" for which the answer might be - to write more code. But the question I'm asking is what's the job of system/software developer. And to that the answer is very different. At least for me it is"building solutions to business problems, in the most efficient way". So in that case more/better code does not necessarily bring you closer to your goal.

As a person, not from UK can someone explain how could Google / YT obtain information about name/surname based solely on phone number. Isn't that GDPR infringement right there ? If my son were to use my phone anywhere, there is no consent on my part to share my personal information with the service provider.

I've tried to log in and use the product - there is a button "Try for free". However, after login I'm redirected to billing with no way of trying anything without payment.

I hope this is not intentional, but seeing this _dishonest_ approach it prevents me from exploring the product further, as I'm not sure what else might be hidden underneath

While agreeing with that,I feel optimistic that AI will increase the number of SME which can provide superior services due to lower costs for better CX

Unfortunately I'm one of those who haven't working stuff but hopefully will have one soon enough.

My thought process on agentic work is following- treating them for input-output operations to merge with deterministic processes.

To be more specific- from what I see in my non-tech industry, when you try to implement process management, people are quite good and terrible at implementing agreed processes at the same time. They are great at detecting deviation from process - when exception is needed and terrible to do same thing 1000th time in a row.

So on high level, I think agents should address automation, and detect when there is deviation from the process. In which case a human person should take over.

Tldr - I don't thing agentic workflows without human will be there any time soon. But we will have 2 human + agents replacing 10 human team

Thanks I will check it out. Seems like it might be spot on what I'm looking for.

But I have to ask - why do you hate Python? :))) I mean AI space has is python first (intuitively) so SDK for python would seem to be logical. Or am I missing smth?

Would you be willing to share insights and help with mentoring in private. I'm going this path (building SaaS) and would appreciate someone with experience to share to discuss topic.

Do I understand correctly, this solution focuses on producing documentation, but not consuming it. Is this correct understanding?

I would say pretty much the idea is as follow: "Let's do it so User would know how to use it before we are big", and once you're big enough - you can set the trend. But at the beginning it's just not worth it and highly risky