This sounds good in theory, but have you hired someone in 2026?
Developers are really lazy in general and don't want to work. The more people you hire, the more you run into the chance of gumming up productivity with unproductive developers.
Even if they are productive, once you cross the threshold of 30 people even productive developers become lazy because of entitlement, bad resource distribution, or complexities from larger teams.
We don't even have to talk about teams of 1000+. Ownership is just dead at that point.
In 2026, having just 5 engineers with AI means you can cut through all the waste and get stuff done. If they start being weird, you can see it pretty easily vs. when engineers are being weird in a team of 50-1000+.
It's not rocket science to see leadership decide to cut down on teams to better manage weirdness in devs. More people doesn't mean more results unfortunately because of work culture nowadays.
You are consuming non-renewable resources by reading this on your device and posting a comment for your entertainment.
At least with Moltbook, it is an interesting study for inter-agent communications. Perhaps an internal Moltbook is what will pave the path towards curing cancer or other bleeding-edge research.
With your comment, you are just wasting non-renewable resources just for your brain to feel good.
I just mean people are just not excited about tech as they used to be.
I would expect, out of all the sites on the Internet, that people would say something like trying to lead some initiative that they never had the courage to do so before leaving the company if given no opportunity for the love of the industry.
Most of my neighbors who have well more than $10M in the bank (Tesla stock, houses, cash, etc.) and they all work because they enjoy it. The younger neighbors quit and just sit around doing nothing but collecting rent money from houses.
But of course, the only constant in life is that things will change. It isn't that surprising I suppose.
It's either that, or you are 100X slower for not using Claude Code. The manpower per hour savings are most likely more worth it than protecting some inputs.
You could also always run a local LLM like GLM for sensitive documents or information on a separate computer, and never expose that to third party LLMs.
You also need to remember that if you hire regular employees that they are still untrustworthy at a base level. There needs to be some obfuscation anyway since they can steal your data/info too as a human. Very common case especially when they run off to China or something to clone your company where IP laws don't matter.
While I agree that smart people tend to play the system, I will offer another explanation.
I think university students are just weirder now. They just don't have the same social skills as before. Maybe Covid has erased social skills and behaviors, or maybe the internet is too prevalent.
I don't know what the social equivalent of the Overton Window would be, but I think that's shifted so hard that traditional autism tests would mark most modern students as autistic.
I've only been using AI for small editor tools or for common utils (math, physics, string manipulation) instead of importing libraries to reduce random dependencies.
I find that most LLMs hallucinate and write too much bad code.
However, with Claude Opus 4.5 it's completely shifted my entire day. I'm out here running 8 concurrent agents knocking items off our todo list like crazy. I've gone from 99% manual code to 1% over the course of the last 4 days.
Never thought this was going to happen until at least 2060...