Readit NewsFor simple changes I actually found smaller models better because they're so much faster. So I shifted my focus from "best model" to "stupidest I can get away with".
I've been pushing that idea even further. If you give up on agentic, you can go surgical. At that point even 100x smaller models can handle it. Just tell it what to do and let it give you the diff.
Also I found the "fumble around my filesystem" approach stupid for my scale, where I can mostly fit the whole codebase into the context. So I just dump src/ into the prompt. (Other people's projects are a lot more boilerplatey so I'm testing ultra cheap models like gpt-oss-20b for code search. For that, I think you can go even cheaper...)
Patent pending.
My own very naive and underinformed sense: OpenAI doesn't have other revenue paths to fall back on like Google does. The GPT5 strategy really makes sense to me if I look at this as a market share strategy. They want to scale out like crazy, in a way that is affordable to them. If it's that cheap, then they must have put a ton of work in to some scaling effort that the other vendors just don't care about as much, whether due to loss-leader economics or VC funding. It really makes me wonder if OpenAI is sitting on something much better that also just happens to be much, much more expensive.
Overall, I'm weirdly impressed because if that was really their move here, it's a slight evidence point that shows that somewhere down in their guts, they do really seem to care about their original mission. For people other than power users, this might actually be a big step forward.
Over time, jobs start taking long enough to the point where you need to split them. Separate jobs are assigned slices of the original batch. Eventually, there are so many slices that you make a Jenkins job where the sole responsibility is firing off these individual jobs.
Then you start hitting the real painpoints in Jenkins. Poor allocation of jobs across your nodes/agents, often overloading CPU/Mem on machines, and you struggle to manage the ungodly interface that is the Jenkins REST endpoint. You install many Jenkins addons to try and address the scheduling problems, and end up with a team dedicated to managing this Jenkins infrastructure.
The scaling struggles continue to amass and you end up needing separate Jenkins instances to battle the load. Any attempt at replacing the Jenkins infrastructure goes on standstill, as the amount of random scripts found in Jenkinsfiles has created an insurmountable vendor lock-in.
You read a post about a select-for-update job scheduler and reflect on simpler times. You cry as you refactor your Jenkins Groovy DSL.
Tests were invented to express the "why" for the normal guy. They don't strictly prevent compilation, but a proper workflow will see them halt your process in the same way, offering the same outcome.
Granted, there are a lot of horribly written tests out there that don't tell you "why" — or, well, anything. As always, people will find a way to abuse anything you put in front of them. But when used well...
I'd also love it if this were applied to politics and laws.
Why isn't the rivalry considered to be between the QB and someone on the defense? There's actually two matchups in an NFL game (plus specials but whatever), the two offense versus defense pairings. It's odd to make the rivalry about two guys who aren't directly tackling each other, when there are people on both teams who really are tackling those guys.