kenosha

Yes, I am. I’ve been working on a language for what I think the future of programming might look like under fast and intelligent LLMs. In my own projects and at work it’s already getting close to where the inner loop of checking, linking, compiling and running is slower than the LLMs thinking and edits. I’ve been working on a language that makes it fast to run large programs without sacrificing lots of runtime performance. There are some other tools and features to hopefully keep the inner loop tight.

Additionally, I’ve been really fascinated by the idea of a language that makes LLM observation and rewrites at runtime possible. There is an interface to get profile data and replace functions at runtime based on the analysis of an LLM.

Lastly, I’ve always wanted a language that could model more of the external environment and make those easier/safer to interact with. I think of libraries like Kysely as an example of making that easier. It’s a really cool time to be playing around with these.

I just use the tea CLI. There is pretty good compatibility between tea and forgejo. The only place I’ve found it to be incomplete is forgejo’s actions api was missing some endpoints.

The bike analogy is pretty funny. Electric bikes are great at increasing accessibility, but have two major downsides I've seen: they damage trails faster than regular bikes and enable untrained riders to get hurt and hurt others much easier.

Back on topic though, I wonder how much can be gleaned from reading reddit (and twitter) about such a narrative-driven topic. At this point, I figure that everyone is either lying, not a person, insane, or trying to sell something. As soon as I stop reading from these platforms and their messages, the narratives they sell cease to exist, and things become much more normal. There was a time when I felt like online discussion was helpful in learning and expanding horizons, but now it feels like it narrows my experience and makes it more myopic.

I feel like I’m missing something between what is explained here and claims that agent driven coding massively speeds up output. Certain parts of this like Day 2s decomposition into steps and Day 3s context packet seem to imply that the author already knows the codebase. They know what steps need to be taken to fix the problem and they know what abstractions exist. That all makes sense to me and reflects what I’ve experienced. It helps get done what I already know. But I still have to understand and know the codebase which feels at odds with some of the massive upside some people are selling. This might be a little adjacent to the main point, but overall I’ve had similar good experiences with the points raised on day 2 + 3.

It would be interesting to also report Alpha and Beta for the portfolios. Absolute returns are great but don’t tell the whole story. Perhaps also average holding duration.

I get conflicted feelings about dismissing detailed prose as doing nothing more than wrapping weak ideas in flowery disguise. Certainly, it’s very possible to write pretentiously. And more than that I’d argue it is __easy__. But simple, straightforward sentences are also __easy__.

I think in both cases, easily written simple sentences and easily written pretentious ones, the author fools themselves with a false understanding. Instead, when they’ve really considered the words and the meaning — they’ve extensively thought and worked on what they are thinking — then writing either way can be impactful.

No tears for the writer, no tears for the reader.