Another pattern I’m noticing is strong advocacy for Opus, but that requires at least the 5x plan, which costs about $100 per month. I’m on the ChatGPT $20 plan, and I rarely hit any limits while using 5.2 on high in codex.
Another pattern I’m noticing is strong advocacy for Opus, but that requires at least the 5x plan, which costs about $100 per month. I’m on the ChatGPT $20 plan, and I rarely hit any limits while using 5.2 on high in codex.
Code is now cheap, so the advantage moved into things that cannot be copied by looking, accumulated data, hidden workflows, trust, and judgment earned by staying inside a problem too long.
Big companies copy shapes, not gravity. If your edge is visible, it is temporary. If it only appears over time, you are still early.
- Build something boring that makes money. Excitement is optional; users are not.
- Use AI less like a chatbot and more like infrastructure, background processes that think while I sleep.
- Go back to fundamentals that compound, graphics, systems, taste.
- Experiment selectively; curiosity without commitment.
- Invest in people, not “networking.” Fewer pings, more real conversations.
- Protect focus like equity.
One differentiator among others: try finding a stack with full self-hosted auth. Most push you toward third parties! I wanted to own my users.
https://medium.com/@level09/the-stack-that-owns-you-7ff06b26...
How far did you have to stray from your “actual stack” for package-ability, for instance?
Neat project - especially as pure FOSS.
Stack choices: Flask for its elegant simplicity without hidden conventions, Vue with Vuetify over CDN to skip build-tool pain (massive productivity and time win btw), PostgreSQL because boring is reliable, Redis (optional) for sessions and caching, and Celery when background jobs are needed (optional too)
Your project fits perfectly with what I need, I’ve built the functionality (using python even) now I need all the other stuff to get it up and running on the web. Thanks for doing this!
You never needed 1000s of engineers to build software anyway, Winamp & VLC were build by less than four people. You only needed 1000s of people because the executive vision is always to add more useless junk into each product. And now with AI that might be even harder to avoid. This would mean there would be 1000s of do-everything websites in the future in the best case, or billions of doing one-thing terribly apps in the worst case.
percentage of good, well planned, consistent and coherent software is going to approach zero in both cases.
for me AI has been less about building more/fast, and more about unlocking potential that was always out of reach.
Knowledge gaps that would've taken years to fill, new angles I wouldn't have thought to explore on my own. It's not that it makes more software.
it just makes you more capable of tackling things you couldn't before.