Well I've had more mixed experiences with other kinds of professions. Real estate agents have fibbed to me about the condition of the property, recruitment agents have misrepresented the role, financial advisors have given me sub-optimal advice. There didn't seem to be much in the structure to prevent this. Doctors, nurses and surgeons on the other hand were very careful and thorough, and that included telling me things I didn't want to hear. This makes sense. Medicine is much more serious - people's long-term health and lives are at risk.
I don't deny there's privilege involved in my case. Again, this seems an institutional problem. The medical field as a whole needs more inclusive frameworks to deal with women's health, racial justice, LGBTIQ, ageism and much more. These are issues need to be addressed at an institution and even whole-of-society level. You can't expect each individual to independently solve for them all. At the very least, they need education.
But it's good that being virtuous is the "easy path" for them. That's how I want it to be. Why would I want to make it difficult or put impediments in the way of my doctors doing their job well?
My point is that, when the institution supports and encourages virtuous behaviour, the actors within the institution are more likely to practice virtue.
I think this is also largely the point of Plato's Republic.
Admittedly this is anecdotal, but I've visited many doctors over the years, as a patient, and pretty much all of them treated me well, practiced their jobs professionally and gave me good advice and treatments. I never had a doctor give me advice that turned out to be wrong or ill intentioned.
Again ... maybe it's just my experience. None of these were super life threatening conditions. However I did go under the operating knife at least once; in that case, the operation was successful, healed me of the condition, and never caused any negative side-effects to this day.
Maybe there's a difference in regulation. A lot of the "entrepreneurial" landscape seems unregulated and a kind of Wild West, and I suppose that allows for certain kinds of personalities to succeed by suspect means. The medical field, by contrast, is quite regulated and there are very real risks to malpractice. Thus, I think it attracts better people and allows them to succeed.
Maybe it's similar to how dictators often take over in poor or struggling countries, whereas they find it harder to get a foothold in developed, prosperous countries with strong institutions.
FWIW, I've been using AI, but instead of "max # of lines/commits", I'm optimising for "min # of pr comments/iterations/bugs". My goal is to end up with less/simpler code and more/bigger impact. The real goal is business value, and ultimately human value. Optimise for that, using AI where it fits.
Along those lines, some techniques I've been dabbling in:
1. Getting multiple agents to implement a requirement from scratch, them combining the best ideas from all of them with my own informed approach.
2. Gathering documentation (requirements, background info, glossaries, etc), targeting an Agent at it, and asking carefully selected questions for which the answers are likely useful.
3. Getting agents to review my code, abstracting review comments I agree with to a re-usable checklist of general guidelines, then using those guidelines to inform the agents in subsequent code reviews. Over time I hope this will make the code reviews increasingly well fitted to the code base and nature of the problems I work on.
Can you provide a link to this app?
Or alternately, share a few of the prompts by which you built it?
I only ask because, if it's really that easy/simple, I'd like to do the same thing!