Yes, very much so, although I've come believe that the corporate jobs outside of SWE might be even more performative. It also seems like something that has become way worse since the late 2010s, in tech specifically at least.
I also feel like giving a shout out to the PDF version of the official PostgreSQL manual. It was one of the most enjoyable and engaging tech books I've ever read, and seems like pretty much the gold standard in what official documentation can look like. It took me a while to figure this out though, because the UX of the standard HTML version of the manual is pretty clunky.
100%. I would also say that this broadly applies to pretty much all of the AI subreddits, and much of AI Twitter as well. Very little nuanced or thoughtful discussions to be found. Looks more like a bunch of people arguing about their favorite sports teams.
Almost every single post on the ClaudeAI subreddit is like this. I use Opus 4.5 in my day to day work life and it has quickly become my main axe for agentic stuff but its output is not a world-shattering divergence from Anthropic's previous, also great iterations. The religious zealotry I see with these things is something else.
Yes, as far as I can tell infinite scroll + 2010s era social media recommendation algorithms alone have already decimated the wider human collective's ability to think for themselves, and has subsequently eroded sane discourse and democratic norms in societies all across the globe.
I also find them very developer-centric — testers get forced into upfront design work that doesn’t fit how they naturally test, and many struggle with it. I’ve had better results by expressing behavior directly and keeping UI concerns thin, instead of using a wrapper around page structure.
I'm sorry, but if your testers are not comfortable getting involved in the early design stages of your software in a 21st century world, then there's at least a 90% chance that their primary role at your company is perpetuating organizational dysfunction.
Most of my career has been defined by cleaning up the gargantuan messes the culture of "throw tickets over the wall to QA" created, and it has been very, very ugly. It defies common sense how culture around tools and processes for dev and ops roles continues to evolve over time, but for some reason testers are still trying to test software off in a silo, like it's released once or twice a year on CD-ROM.
Not me. More than half of my 20s were mostly defined by working service industry jobs, hanging around with party kids, staying awake until the sun came up, and basically getting by doing the bare minimum for everything. It was probably the lowest point of my life cognitively. It wasn't really until sometime around my mid-30s that I started feeling pretty sharp and performing well on cognitive tests. I didn't grow up in an environment where there were any cultural expectations of achievement in anything. I had to find all of that on my own through a lot of trial and error. That being said, who knows where I would be today if a nice chunk of my 20s had been less dumb? I ruminate about it fairly often.
Yup. I think programmers are giving themselves too much credit here. I love programming, but let's not kid ourselves, at most organizations at least 75% of the code needed to make something a working product is BS. I'd rather prompt an LLM agent to take care of that while I review it so that I can spend my limited energy on the more interesting bits. I find the exercise of prompting an LLM to generate boring code to my exact specifications far more intellectually stimulating than doing any of that stuff by hand, and the time that I have invested in this area has paid dividends in making the code cleaner, more consistent, and more coherent.
Yes, can confirm that as a senior developer who has needed to spend huge amounts of time reviewing junior code from off-shore contractors with very detailed and explicit instructions, dabbling in agentic LLM coding tools like Claude Code has felt like like a gift from heaven.
I also have concerns about said junior developers wielding such tools, because yes, without being able to supply the right kind of context and being able to understand the difference between a good solution and a bad solution, they will produce tons of awful, but technically working code.
This is definitely a useful exercise worth going through for the educational value before eventually surrendering and just using the big models owned by "unprofitable companies."
Good simple nootropic, but I like the cup of coffee even better with a 200mg capsule of a high quality L-Theanine to give a zen-like calm to the stimulation of the caffeine. Underrated as heck IMHO.