Kind of ironic for these companies to make their moat software while at the same time saying that SaaS and software development in general is obsolete

"programming is solved" has also been said, I don't know how someone can say that with a straight face, let alone going on a podcast tour with it as the mantra

I have a hard time imagining anything where writing a browser wouldn't be an excellent transferable foundation. Even your example: writing css will never teach you as much as writing a css engine.

Sorry if I was unclear. I mean they'll never have enough time to learn a significant amount of modern web tech because they'll be working up to it from lower layers and basics.

Browsers from scratch are multi-year projects for multiple people. Even just skinning and minor tweaks to modern browsers is a deep well for one person.

I feel like your example exactly describes why the development pipeline is production. Just because the critical hours of the system are different doesn't mean it's any less important.

I have never worked in a company where it is okay for production to be down at any time. Critical hours or not.

And if production is down even if there is just one user, it is all hands on deck.

I was trying to debug/fix a segfault in the JVM which kept getting flagged

That sounds very dystopian. The ai teacher part, not the no devices part

That would have sadly be an improvement for the majority of teachers I've had in my life, even university classes because they were taught by a TA phd student I couldn't understand.

It sounds distopian, but AI has been a big boost to learning at least for me personally. Of course the problem is when it's wrong.

I never said that AI should replace all teachers. AI can help provide more teaching labor (more teaching capacity). Every child can have a personalized tutor in addition to human teachers.

See Bloom's 2 sigma problem: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bloom%27s_2_sigma_problem

Last sporting event I went to I was able to check my car seat at the stroller check, the workers didn't bat an eye :)

I know right. I kept waiting for a sarcasm tag at the end

I've seen Bryan Cantrill present at a few conferences and his talks are always the best.

A recent one (2025q4) he gave at Jane Street, "Andreessen’s Folly - The False Dichotomy of Software and Hardware":

* https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=v0JjG0Qfwi8

This exactly matches my experience. I also suspected that it was my higher threshold for code quality but Ai generated code is just not worth adding to a project without very strict reviews, unless it's non production and I want to fully give the project over to Ai

> You can keep burning tokens until it complies. Thats what I do and I get good results.

Like "it compiles" is literally the lowest bar, not "good results."

Depends on the language and the way code is written. Actually if you can run the code locally, getting things to compile is a bottleneck in Java especially for constructor juggling. Once code compiles, iterations do the rest. Iterations are better done by hand I think, we can get feedback on the code while keeping things fresh in our heads. For critical stuff where coding = thinking, its just faster to code.

But those are the parts where it's important to struggle through the learning process even if you're slower than AI. if you defer to an LLM because it can do your work in a new codebase faster than you, that code base will stay new to you for forever. You'll never be able to review the AI code effectively.