armanckeser

This has always been the most valuable part of the job if you ask me. Its just that the other parts of the job were quite hard to get right letting people build a career out of that specialization.

Not really. I mean that wholeheartedly that as we go forward 5% maybe maximum 20% of code will NEED to be hand written.

I also know you are not really right because I was basically known as the pycharm guy in our office and cc basically immediately killed my usage and its safe to say early adopters of something like pycharm whose selling point is the easy integration will leave for agentic practices

Just because Anthropic isn't hiring juniors doesn't mean the rest of the world wouldn't or shouldn't. They have pressure to be the best on an extremely competitive surprisingly easy to enter market, they don't have time for juniors.

People here do speak as if majority of software is quality. Most software is meh at best, I am willing to bet a fully autonomous opus 5.5 would create and maintain software better than the average software companies build and force people to use in house.

Pretty sure following this advice would kill them really fast. Only 5% of code will ever need to be hand typed if that. They have analytics that show their IDEs were used by people who deeply card about efficiency and there US nothing more efficient than managing cloud agents.

In a few years we won't even be reviewing code. We will have abstracted code into building blocks and review those abstractions only.

What would Anthropic gain by wanting juniors to disappear into another trade? Obviously their goal is to turn a profit meaning they need to be more efficient and they seem to believe that will come from senior engineers. They have the supply for it, why hire juniors when seniors are dying to working in your shop

I have found it really helpful to just give read only access to application databases for my agents and since they have the source code they get to learn and run regular http calls against the services. As long as the service itself is built local first with say a sync engine works like a charm

I think open source repos are overdue for better, more efficient flow controls as well as an open cycle system. I wrote about this a while ago[1], but I am hoping to see some applications using things like the decisions API etc to make the maintainers lives easier.

[1]: https://armanckeser.com/writing/jellyfin-flow

OS is something but windows apps themselves are broken, everything leaks memory, any plans to address that?

Indeed! After years of wanting to finally I was able to create my own budgeting app with my own needs with auto ingestion of transactions, an Uscis case tracker, gh stars organizer, you name it. The list of ideas I accrued over the years is just now 1 prompt away from being a testable iterable app that I can self host and use behind tailscale. Good enough for my wife even. There is something more addicting about building for others though, I did open source my apps in case it helps anyone, but I presume its why chefs become chefs, put something out and immediately see its effect on others. I guess now marketing will be even more important. Even for free and genuinely morally good ideas that don't have an agenda behind them and I am a bit scared that most people who care about marketing that much are not trying to spread free public utility around...

Its true that owning hardware is really important especially at an age where privacy is becoming more and more critical. But the truth is hardware on the cloud is more efficient, it would allow devices to be literally be a screen and a wifi card, you can do anything anywhere. All consumer software is just colored pixels in front of you. To 90% of the planet a truly fast cloud streamed UI would be some much more capable and convenient. With generative AI more and more of our interfaces will also be generative. As the way we input things to most of our devices is literally pressing a location on flashing pixels, best experiences will naturally be optimized around a good screen and connection and that's just the nature of evolution for software being data <-> presentation medium

Sounds like free market at work to me. I am just glad there is quite a lot of competition in a field that I would have assumed would have huge costs of entry

I wrote about how to redirect to nitter instances on any platform a month ago [1], and a few days later we had the cease and desist. Fortunately, you can redirect to twiiit.com and that will find a working instance for you.

[1] https://armanckeser.com/writing/redirecting-x-com

Why assume token costs will increase as opposed to become commoditized?

I am not sure the author of the comment you are replying to understands that LLM systems have prompt caches

There are many reasons why one might not want an account, and I presume your view is exactly why X created this gate in the first place. However if you are like me and your main use case was say Android, a simple app install is basically no work. I wish I were able to do it on the network layer without a CA though, that would have been the silver bullet

If your aim is to just get started, get yourself a Claude account and just download Claude Code. You don't really have to read anything on it, as you use agents you will get to learn what they are good and bad at but defaults are quite good anyway if you use a capable model like Opus 5. Truth is there are a million guides and plugins in the open but they really provide incremental gains for a beginner as they would overwhelm you.

If you are more conscious of the price, try out opencode or pi and research OpenRouter or similar for coding with models like GLM 5.2 or Kimi K3 or even Deepseek 4, they will be less out of the box but cheaper.

Places like r/selfhosted try this and to be completely frank, puts that community into the "naive" side of history. One day not so far in the future AI assisted/generated will mean more reliable, better tested, better documented by default, and do you think AI companies are not focusing on making their LLMs not sound like AI? In 2 generations everything we know about identifying LLM generated content will be obsolete. Only thing that matters is if the content is quality or not.

Tangent but what a horrible website at least on my android. Starts as light mode, suddenly shows three streched columns, turns to dark mode and the title is hidden behind the header. After years of being around how can they end up with something like this

I personally find AI doomsday preaching incredibly arrogant. You think that we will create super intelligence, something that will exponentially get smarter, and the thing it will do is... end humans? Why wouldn't it just find solutions to problems we struggle with? Also people don't live to work, its asinine to argue AI replacing jobs is the problem, obviously the problem is the gains being concentrated higher up. Another thing is, we argue AI needs to be maximally useful to everyone in the world, and the argument to do that is government control??? I would rather push for AI to be superintelligent faster than any one human can control it. Frankly human controlled superintelligence is likely a worse outcome then uncontrolled superintelligence, at the very least there is no guarantee one will be better than the other.

I don't use poetry anymore but do check the updates before claiming such things

https://python-poetry.org/blog/announcing-poetry-2.4.0/

I think even just seeing the number of open PRs might be a deterrence to contributors thinking of opening PRs.

So this is exactly what's unintuitive about queues, an analogy would be car lanes. Intuition might lead you to conclude that if a 2 lane road has traffic constantly going to 4 lanes will solve the traffic. But this is not true. Many people that would have used the road might have been using public transport or just decided not to commute or stay inside normally will join the traffic until it once again equilibriates. Adding more maintainers without addressing the core problems of the queue won't lead to success

Fair call-out, although couple things to point out, I am used to a Squash Merge workflow which I think makes reviews easier based on comments as the reviewer gets to see what changed after their comment easier. Many of the commits are merge commits. If you actually look at the timeline of the original PR, you will see that it also started with a smaller scope but as time passed I also went through the cycle of "while at it, let me also fix this" loop that I mentioned in the article.

The point of the article is: there is a feature that people would like, there is someone who wants to add it, the appropriate time and a lot more for this feature to be merged has been spent yet the feature is nowhere to be found. That's the two way street I am trying to get across. I wish I wasn't even able to open the PR, I wish the maintainer would utilize more automation tools to groom feature requests and potential contributors with agreed upon plans and agreed upon timelines so that both sides time could be used much more effectively.

As far as PR descriptions etc goes, I asked multiple times what the best route to merging would be. If that went through better descriptions, I was happy to do that, as you can see, I wasn't aware of the "no conventional commits" rule, so in my next PRs I used the correct approach, but that should be completely automatable. Yes, I should have spent more time studying Jellyfin's conventions, but I shouldn't have to, not because its unfair for me, simply because there are more contributors than maintainers, so maintainers should not rely on desired behavior from contributors, they should force that behavior as much as possible.

Agreed. A problem I see with how AI reviews have been used is that after one kicks it off, now the maintainer has to review both the PR and the AI's review which doesn't really save time. Like you said, if AI review was used more intentionally, e.g. all PRs have to go through AI review that checks for the baseline requirements and only after the contributor signals "I addressed everything AI commented either by giving my disagreement reasons or making the changes", maintainers spending time on the review could save a lot of quality time.

Thanks a lot! I appreciate the kind words. I do want to clarify that I think in Jellyfin-web's case, the maintainer does mean well and doesn't really have the "benevolent dictat... er, maintainer" approach. But there seems to be this defeatist argument of: we have one maintainer which means 6 months per PR and features not being merged, that I think Open Source projects could do a better job at

It is a rite of passage. Meet Jellypin, my fork that only allows watching media with subtitles