Readit NewsContent marketing, gamified SEO, and obtrusive ads significantly hurt the quality of Google search. For all its flaws, LLMs don’t feel this gamified yet. It’s disappointing that this is probably where we’re headed. But I hope OpenAI and Anthropic realize that this drop in search result quality might be partly why Google’s losing traffic.
This Twitter-style faux-casual way of writing is so common among AI people right now (see Sam Altman) and it’s extremely grating. I don’t know anything about this project, but if they really cared about their users, I would hope that they’d use capital letters and punctuation when addressing them in an official announcement.
That kind of posturing is forgivable when you’re a teen. When you do it as the CEO of one of the most influential companies today, it’s grating. When you do it because you’re another CEO in a similar market and you’re trying to signal that you’re part of the “in” crowd, it’s frankly embarrassing.
It's started making me worried that I can't even use the app in a place where anyone else is, lest someone shoulder surf that and wonder WTF I'm looking at.
It’s like having dinner at a restaurant that you know is owned by a mafia boss and then being surprised when you get robbed while you eat there.
Insanity driven development: altering your api to accept 7 levels of "broken and different" structures so as to bend to the will of the llms
If you automatically assume that what the LLM spits out is what the API ought to be then I agree that that’s bad engineering. But if you’re using it to brainstorm what an intuitive interface would look like, that seems pretty reasonable.
https://www.ft.com/content/4f20fbb9-a10f-4a08-9a13-efa1b55dd...
> The bank [Goldman Sachs] now has 11,000 engineers among its 46,000 employees, according to [CEO David] Solomon, and is using AI to help draft public filing documents.
> The work of drafting an S1 — the initial registration prospectus for an IPO — might have taken a six-person team two weeks to complete, but it can now be 95 per cent done by AI in minutes, said Solomon.
> “The last 5 per cent now matters because the rest is now a commodity,” he said.
We’ve long used local agents like Cursor and Claude Code, so we didn’t expect too much. But Codex shines in a few areas:
Parallel task execution: You can batch dozens of small edits (refactors, tests, boilerplate) and run them concurrently without context juggling. It's super nice to run a bunch of tasks at the same time (something that's really hard to do in Cursor, Cline, etc.)
It kind of feels like a junior engineer on steroids, you just need to point it at a file or function, specify the change, and it scaffolds out most of a PR. You still need to do a lot of work to get it production ready, but it's as if you have an infinite number of junior engineers at your disposal now all working on different things.
Model quality is good, but hard to say it's that much better than other models. In side-by-side tests with Cursor + Gemini 2.5-pro, naming, style and logic are relatively indistinguishable, so quality meets our bar but doesn’t yet exceed it.
One issue with junior devs is that because they’re not fully autonomous, you have to spend a non trivial amount of time guiding them and reviewing their code. Even if I had easy access to a lot of them, pretty quickly that overhead would become the bottleneck.
Did you think that managing a lot of these virtual devs could get overwhelming or are they pretty autonomous?
The golden standard is Applied Science channel, of course, but there are some smaller channels with similar vibe.