I think there's a big asymmetry between the kind of user and their environment that wants to toy with agent teams and the kind of user that would ever want to deal with the unwelcome hassle of having kafka as a dependency.
Readit Newsweego commented on Show HN: Calfkit – an SDK to build distributed, event-driven AI agents on Kafka github.com/calf-ai/calfki... · Posted by u/ryanyu
weego commented on CSS sucks because we don't bother learning it (2022) idiallo.com/blog/learn-cs... · Posted by u/Brajeshwar
CSS doesn't suck. What sucks is that somewhere along the line we forgot that it's a visual markup tool and not a programming language, and it's been treated as such for far too long.
It's been a while since I touched Scala but wasn't that a thing in previous versions, minus the braces not being present?
Yes, that's all just as it was, and in places braces were not required / interchangeable so this is more of an optional compiler choice than a real change
weego commented on SoftBank sells its entire stake in Nvidia cnbc.com/2025/11/11/softb... · Posted by u/mfiguiere
I would have thought that the OpenAI bet is way more risky, because if someone comes along with a better model it could really hurt OpenAI. NVIDIA seems harder to dethrone imo.
Probably so, but that doesn't mean their value can keep scaling without heavy diminishing returns. Softbank must assume they've taken 80%+ of the gains from this phase of NVIDIA's growth, and want to capture the next wave of growth.
I agree with you that OpenAI seems much more risky in terms of it's actual true viability as a business, but the risk:reward must be there for Softbank.
It’s natural to feel anxious as we approach the inevitable automation of all human labor
This is sell-side idealist thinking and blurred view of reality. We're not approaching it, we're not even seeing metrics to suggest that any sub-division of any business is making serious progress there at all.
Too many people are hyping something that will not happen in our lifetimes and we risk looking beyond the terrible state of large global economies, poor business practice and human exploitation on mass scales to a place we will never see. It's more fun to try and shape future possibilities for large profit that we'll probably never have to justify, than attempt to deal with current realities, and thus go against the grain of investment trends today, for an uncertain benefit.
weego commented on Show HN: Sober not Sorry – free iOS tracker to help you quit bad habits sobernotsorry.app/... · Posted by u/molozhenko
Where is the app to start e.g. drinking, it is morally relativistic to say these are 'bad habits'
Perhaps reflect on how lucky you are that you don't have any understanding or empathy for why some people might really need an app like this
Vercel being involved is a huge red flag.
NextJS is a pile of garbage, and their platform is absurdly expensive and leans heavily on vendor lock in.
It's just a tool. Are the people that run Makita terrible? Who knows, I just use their tools to fix cars. I use tools to build apps for businesses that pay me. There is far too much ideology based decision making in tech. Just build stuff with it or not.
Far too many smart people are putting their energies into such discussions that add a lot of drag to the process of society and humanity moving forward for no net gain at all.
> I would love to see an anti-AI take that doesn't hinge on the idea that technology forces people to be lazy/careless/thoughtless.
The article sort of goes sideways with this idea but pointing out that AI coding robs you a deep understanding of the code it produces is a valid and important criticism of AI coding.
A software engineer's primary job isn't producing code, but producing a functional software system. Most important to that is the extremely hard to convey "mental model" of how the code works and an expertise of the domain it works in. Code is a derived asset of this mental model. And you will never know code as well as a reader and you would have as the author for anything larger than a very small project.
There are other consequences of not building this mental model of a piece of software. Reasoning at the level of syntax is proving to have limits that LLM-based coding agents are having trouble scaling beyond.
Who are this endless cohort of develops who need to maintain a 'deep understanding' of their code. I'd argue a high % of all code written globally on any given day that is not some flavour of boilerplate, while written with good intention, is ultimately just short-lived engineering detritus of it even gets a code review to pass.
weego commented on Getting AI to work in complex codebases github.com/humanlayer/adv... · Posted by u/dhorthy
Interesting read, and some interesting ideas, but there's a problem with statements like these:
> Sean proposes that in the AI future, the specs will become the real code. That in two years, you'll be opening python files in your IDE with about the same frequency that, today, you might open up a hex editor to read assembly.
> It was uncomfortable at first. I had to learn to let go of reading every line of PR code. I still read the tests pretty carefully, but the specs became our source of truth for what was being built and why.
This doesn't make sense as long as LLMs are non-deterministic. The prompt could be perfect, but there's no way to guarantee that the LLM will turn it into a reasonable implementation.
With compilers, I don't need to crack open a hex editor on every build to check the assembly. The compiler is deterministic and well-understood, not to mention well-tested. Even if there's a bug in it, the bug will be deterministic and debuggable. LLMs are neither.
We also have to pretend that anyone has ever been any good at writing descriptive, detailed, clear and precise specs or documentation. That might be a skillset that appears in the workforce, but absolutely not in 2 years. A technical writer that deeply understands software engineering so they can prompt correctly but is happy not actually looking at code and just goes along with whatever the agent generates? I don't buy it.
This seems like a typical engineer forgets people aren't machines line of thinking.
The "investment" came from their revenue, and will be immediately counted in their revenue again.
In this case it seems that if we're being strict here the investment could then also show up as fixed assets on the same balance sheet