I watched people ask LLMs for linting/refactoring help, burning easily 5 minutes for something that could be completed deterministically, locally, in ms using any modern editor.
Quite frankly it was embrassing. We've had tools for static analysis for ages. Use them.
Someone with better knowledge could work 100x faster using 100x fewer resources. They did it the slow, expensive way but at least didn't have to think? Odd flex.
Another framing is "Prioritize". It's not yes or no; it's what are you focusing on right now. There may be plenty of good ideas that are "no" today because you can only work on one at a time.
> The unit you plan in is the truth you will or will not face.
This 100x. "Story points" are evil, simply because they can't be measured. The qualitative nature of story points means that planning assumptions are NEVER checked against reality. It's a strong incentive for management to avoid any responsibility; stay "agile", use "story points", and never ever assess your actual performance or velocity.
The worst managers I've seen straight up forbid talking about the story points. Anyone asking for more information or discussion gets shot down; story points are "just an estimate" after all. Then when that lack of information becomes a problem, employees are forbidden from referring back to previous estimates. Even calibrating story points in a relative sense is expressly forbidden. There is no feedback mechansim to correct poor planning. And that's by design; the system protects and shields mediocre managers from accountability, period.
No, this is quite backwards. I find myself reading code more, to gain context and build the theory for the feature I'm working on. The time it takes to write the code is now trivial compared to designing a good idea. Reading/thinking about code absolutely dominates now that writing code is cheap.
> Muddled prompting by humans gets you the Homer Simpson car you wished for
Well put! Now that we have a magic tool that can generate tokens on demand, the quality of the underlying idea gains enormous importance relative to the code. Tokens are cheap. Good ideas are not.
I would like to hope that some people take advantage of this newfound agentic power to create better theories. But there's a sizable population that seems intent on generating more and more code, regardless of quality.
The plant still need solar energy. They still need electricity within the tissues of the organism to survive (ATP and krebs cycle). Humans have always burned organic matter for light.
Not trying to be a pedant but "Light without electricity" falls down when examined from any angle. It's not a serious claim.
Partly true, but don't blame GeoJSON. Blame the data model.
GeoJSON is firmly rooted in the "simple features" model of spatial data. Sometimes called the "vector data model", this is ubiquitous in GIS. Each geographic entity (aka "Feature") has a single geometry and many non-geometry attributes. Each feature is independent.
The vector data model (for better or worse) is the basis of many systems because it fits the tabular/relational style so closely. What is a feature but a row in a table plus a special column describing its geometry? Topological relationships are ignored by design.
TopoJSON, ESRI coverages, the internal OpenStreetMap data model, and a few others are notable exceptions. They explicitly handle spatial relationships, at the cost of making the model unintelligible to row-based processing.
14x is insane, especially since the quality and quantity of IRL software has barely budged.
One could hope that we'd use these newfound agentic coding powers to actually realize value, improve quality, etc. Instead I see enshittification and stagnation. What are we even doing with all these tokens?
Good advice generally. But please, not at the gym. All gyms have a different vibe but mine is almost strictly no talking. We go there to workout, not to chat. Everyone locked in, headphones on, no nonsense. I've been going for years and I can count on one hand the number of conversations I've witnessed.
But the flipside is, I see the same gym crowd at the coffee shop next door and we always have a good chat there. Context matters.
Quite frankly it was embrassing. We've had tools for static analysis for ages. Use them.
Someone with better knowledge could work 100x faster using 100x fewer resources. They did it the slow, expensive way but at least didn't have to think? Odd flex.
reply