https://decoding-the-gurus.captivate.fm/episode/mini-decodin...
Their podcast revolves around discussing people seen as gurus/grifters and the various tendencies they exhibit and I usually trust it as a sensible source.
It sounds like she's started to follow the algorithm and has changed a lot recently in her position on various topics.
As a bonus there are no ticket barriers so no queues and no overheads of maintaining those machines.
The website was purely because a friend and I were looking for design work during lockdown and put together a couple of things we recently worked on, but basic design and build was a fun ~6 months solo project.
We had a good discussion on https://www.reddit.com/r/architecture/comments/1mlo6hu/tryin... over the weekend with more details, but also happy to answer any questions here.
Looking through other comments here, it's absolutely wild how a tech-oriented audience are happy to completely disregard traditional design (interior, graphic, UI, ...), while championing technology design (systems & databases).
Reminds me of that scene[1] from the Silicon Valley TV show where that designer was tasked to design a server box and he started the meeting showing random pictures to the CEO with some bongo drum soundtrack in order to "establish a common vocabulary" lol, or the brand manual of the infamous Pepsi logo redesign fail[2] full of made up geometrical nature BS stories that the agency pulled out of their ass to milk Pepsi, which I'm sure is what the satire form Silicon Valley was based on.
At this point, I think designers just operate on the basis of "a fool an his money are easily parted".
[1] https://youtu.be/qyLv1dQasaY?si=yUwQU-9EQL3QMxbi&t=6
[2] https://old.reddit.com/r/Design/comments/hspqgd/pepsi_logo_r...
Claude Code power users, what would you say makes it superior to other agents?
I hated at first that it wasn’t like Cursor, sitting in the IDE. Then I realised I was using Cursor completely differently, using it often for small tasks where it’s only moderately helpful (refactoring, adding small functions, autocompleting)
With Claude I have to stop, think and plan before engaging with it, meaning it delivers much more impactful changes.
Put another way, it demands more from me meaning I treat it with more respect and get more out of it
That said, I think that the differing UIs of Cursor (in the IDE) and Claude (in the CLI) fundamentally change how you approach problems with them.
Cursor is “too available”. It’s right there and you can be lazy and just ask it anything.
Claude nudges you to think more deeply and construct longer prompts before engaging with it.
That my experience anyway
Small side remark, but what is the value added of the AI generated documentation for the AI generated code. It's just a burden that increases context size whenever AI needs to re-analyse or change the existing code. It's not like any human is ever going to read the code docs, when he can just ask AI what it is about.
A few times while writing the doc I had to go back and update the previous steps to add missing features.
Also I knew when to stop. It’s not fully finished yet. There are additional stages I need to implement. But as an experienced developer, I knew when I had enough for “core functionalty” that was well defined.
What worries me is how do you become a good developer if AI is writing it all?
One of my strengths as a developer is understanding the problem and breaking it down into steps, creating requirements documents like I’ve discussed.
But that’s a hard-earned skill from years of client work where I wrote the code. I have a huge step up in getting the most from these agents now.