Chad Smith retweeted
Replying to @josevalim
What if the language couldn't express shared mutable objects across threads? I have been experimenting with that in Milo: single owner, refs can't be stored or sent, no Arc. Threads can send messages to eachother to share data. github.com/cs01/milo
Chad Smith retweeted
Replying to @ThePrimeagen
There is little objectivity around programming language debates, and AI will bring an explosion of new ones (I already made two). I took a shot at a more formal way to compare them with Language Explorer.
cs01.github.io/language-expl…
I've never had so much fun with computers in my life.
I literally do whatever the fk I want.
Bending whatever stands in my way to my will.
Tmux doesn't support mouse?
Now it does.
Compiled app looks cool?
Reverse engineered, now it's "open source".
Literally godmode.
Chad Smith retweeted
We’re making a fundamental tradeoff when we use these coding agents, but some of my engineering friends still don’t seem to get it.
I see a lot of engineers make the argument “AI outputs still aren’t that great, code quality isn’t the same as writing it by hand.” And it’s all true, their argument is not wrong.
But a coding agent can produce in a few hours what would take one of these engineers a month, or more. And I’ll even accept at face value that their well-thought-out, carefully written “artisanal code” would be better. But it would take them 10x longer to get out.
So the fundamental thing we’re doing is to take this average code, generated in a day by an LLM, and try to make it a little above average. We are prompting our way onto something we can stand behind and support.
And even if that extra work takes let’s say a week & it’s frustrating as hell to get it to something we can stand behind, a week is still better than spending a month or more. So that’s the tradeoff.
And if you write code for money, pretty soon, nobody is going to let you take a month to write it carefully.
Businesses all exist in a competitive space, if other businesses find a way to move faster by willingly making this tradeoff, they’ll all be forced to work this way. And it’s already happening and it will continue to happen.
Then on top of all this, I notice many of us have this old mental model that we are writing code for other humans to extend, to work with, to add features to, etc. And in that world code quality matters a lot.
But it’s unclear to me now that other humans will ever extend your code again. If these models improve even a little bit more, models will always be extending your code from now on.
In that new world, you have to almost always make this tradeoff and you have to become great at it.
Chad Smith retweeted
As an AI expert who totally doesn't think LLMs are the path to AGI, but uses LLMs very avidly to get things done, here is my take on the utility of top LLMs currently:
1) If you don't know what you're doing in a certain domain, you can get interesting and valuable results, but they will be mixed up with garbage and you'll have trouble identifying the garbage.... In some cases automated methods can be used to test/filter results but this remains mostly dodgy in real-world cases.
2) If you DO know what you're doing in some domain, but are NOT willing to creatively adapt your work-style to the LLMs, or are oriented toward proving the LLMs are dumb and flawed rather than making the most of them ... then you won't get much out of them except time-saving on some rote-ish tasks
3) If you DO know what you're doing in some domain and ARE willing to open-mindedly and creatively work with the LLMs to route around their shortcomings and leverage up their strengths, you can amplify your abilities and output DRAMATICALLY.. though still with some tradeoffs: in many respects LLM-assisted products are still not as good as expert-human-crafted products, though they are also often better in various respects (and can often be produced SO much faster)
Chad Smith retweeted
My wife doesn't understand that I find coding, the thing I do for work, more fun than watching TV.
Chad Smith retweeted
Replying to @FoundersPodcast @FreightAlley
Elon’s “just do it” management style is the opposite of this:
Chad Smith retweeted
An easy way to think through how processes should be re-engineered in a world of AI agents is to figure out where have there been constraints in a workflow due to human time being available.
Vinod Khosla had an interesting way of thinking about this which is that we’ve designed so much of our work to ration scarce resources within the enterprise. So many of our processes are designed to ensure the most expensive doctors, engineers, researchers, marketers, designers, or lawyers are only used at the most critical moments.
But what happens when that level of expertise becomes available on-demand at any point in a process. AI agents effectively let us bring these scarce resources to anyone, on demand, and at the price of the previously cheapest resource.
Most of our work hasn’t been rewired yet to benefit from that change yet. And the teams and companies that figure this out first will stand to gain the most from AI.
Chad Smith retweeted
🐍📦✨Python people!
We want *your* feedback on Python Packaging!
Please help us by responding to our survey @ bit.ly/3qmFQ69
Please RT for reach!
🐍📦✨
Chad Smith retweeted
What's New in PDM 2.0
frostming.com/2022/pdm-2-en/
Chad Smith retweeted
Do you love pipx? It's the apt/brew/chocolatey of the Python world and the topic which we'll be covering with @cs01_software & @mkennedy in about an hour. See you there?
youtube.com/watch?v=wZ5icmr7…
Chad Smith retweeted
Folks, how cool is pLS (as an ls replacement)!?!? Thank you @_ChrisMay for letting me know about it. Here it is listing elements in my @htmx_org course's folder? Note the icons showing git, Python, environments, and more!
Chad Smith retweeted
#Python developers. Do you use pipx ?
16%I use pipx
29%I don't use pipx
55%Never heard of pipx
1,795 votes • Final results


















