dnikolovv

4 ms·

1. 1.▲
   by dnikolovv 6d ago

   That's exactly what I meant.
2. 2.▲
   by dnikolovv 6d ago

   Right. It feels like we're living in a parallel world or something. Can agents code? Sure. Can you let them code on their own for a serious production project? Not a chance.
3. 3.▲
   by dnikolovv 2mo ago

   Reductio ad absurdum.
4. 4.▲
   by dnikolovv 3mo ago

   Doesn't this go directly against what the author is asking about? You're much less likely to enter flow state if you have a team of AI agents which are supposed to be autonomous.
5. 5.▲
   by dnikolovv 3mo ago

   > But I still wanted what the machine had. It triggered something in my brain. And I believed maybe if I used this thing enough, all the tiny little meaningless tasks would eventually add up to something important. > Sometimes I’d fee
6. 6.▲
   by dnikolovv 4mo ago

   Reminds me of this dialogue between a money manager and MIT economist Paul Cootner: - "If you’re so smart, why aren’t you rich?" - "If you’re so rich, why aren’t you smart?"
7. 7.▲
   by dnikolovv 5mo ago

   Don't be ridiculous! We don't do that anymore.
8. 8.▲
   Goose Lays Golden Eggs, Gets Slaughtered(inconsistent.blog)

   3 points by dnikolovv 6mo ago|0 comments
9. 9.▲
   by dnikolovv 7mo ago

   Great article! Sadly, you don't get much engagement these days if you're reasonable about AI. It's either "don't read the code, run 40 subagents and 1000000x your productivity", "programmers are doomed&quo