9 pointsby schipperai6 hours ago4 comments
  • sghiassy5 hours ago
    Do:

    - LOC matter?

    - Do PRs?

    - Do Tokens?

    I’ve never looked up a KPI to figure out who the best engineer is. It’s always obvious to everyone who the best engineer is

    Natural leaders inspire. They don’t need KPIs

  • sghiassy5 hours ago
    Lost me at “low AI exhaust from those setting technical direction should raise questions”

    Wonder what Linus Torvalds’ AI exhaust is??

    • schipperai5 hours ago
      I’d agree Linus is an exceptional leader. And I don’t think most rules apply to him.
    • pydry5 hours ago
      Linus used it to make some toy software I believe.
      • oliculipolicula2 hours ago
        [Disclaimer: no AI whatsoever was used in any part of the following; sorry if you can't verify that, though]

        I've come to think that one unequivocal upside of "affordable ASI" would be to bring about a world of discourse where discursers would hesitate to think of (not to mention carry) themselves as experts. What would be the point? Everyone already knows that everyone has direct access to an expert.

        [Perhaps it reminds me of Le Guin's thoughts on tech X power, especially as represented in The Dispossessed ]

        it would seem to be not just rude, but even snide, to bias your interlocutor towards not carefully verifying the dependencies of your exhaust!

        [In your example, Linus, as a sneak preview of that alt-world in ours, is probably totally OK with not being regarded as an expert in making toy software]

        Widely dispersed and affordable AI would help because it (certainly, imho) makes the alternative, "trust but verify", so easy

        [No need to think about the downsides of checking out and pointing Claude at lines of Linus' toy!]

        And it would be strictly easier than using cloud chatGPT to sow misinformation because there are extra steps in that (--- nonsockpuppets would be inclined to verify the gist of everything they are about to say as indeed misleading)

        [As a bonus, this seems compatible with TFA, non-ideological anti-anti-intellectualism, and

        https://engines.egr.uh.edu/episode/1495

        if, in that "non-anarchist" alt-world, we all assume that technical leaders should be different (not more, not less) than expert engineers

        Should exceptional technical direction setters strive to stay anonymous..? Or use sockpuppets? Moral as well as practical quandaries..! ]

  • jmull5 hours ago
    > Here are some conclusions I’ve reached through experimentation:

    ...a bunch of stuff specific to certain models the author is currently using.

    Experimentation is good for technical leaders, but you want to be focusing on approaches and understanding the fundamental constraints, not detail.

    Many of the things that have completely changed in then last year will completely change in the next year.

    • schipperai4 hours ago
      Fair - some of the points in these examples will rot. What I think transfers are the failure modes: context rot, agents filling in decisions, whether a codebase is greppable. Those can turn into team principles, and you can only learn this through experimentation.
    • schipperai5 hours ago
      Author here. Thanks for the comment.

      I did refer to some specific models, though a lot of these learnings are from experience over the past 6 months or so, and continue to generalize as frontier models improve.

      Curious if there’s a specific point you feel is too detailed?

  • acedTrex5 hours ago
    Wow what a terrible article, just awful stuff lol
    • sghiassy5 hours ago
      It was written by the LinkedIn Cringe bot