2026.03.16
Scott has a huge experience with Open Source (and did some pioneering work in containerization) and is on board with the idea that AI is the future of development. He's really worried that the good guys get busy, overcome their inertia and reservations, and learn the arts of leveraging AI to make good stuff (with efficient token/energy use) and learning how to defend things from the bad guys, who never seem to have the same kind of compunctions about using any tool they can find.
He's fighting a war on two fronts; he yells at me for bringing up stuff from the AI-skeptic side, both from absolutists who will push back against AI tooth and nail, as well as from middle of the road developers who find utility in these "Jr Programmer Level of companions" but keep bumping their head into the limitations and confusion that results as context windows get filled up and what not, as well as some of the infamous AI gaffes making the rounds.
The other front is against executives who are too gung-ho about it all - who say "just build it" without acknowledging how the problem is no longer the coding - we now are in an age of surplus programming/build potential - but deciding what to build that will provide sustainable value, as well as socializing and building community around what gets built.
One of Scott's favorite articles is "The AI Vampire":
Here were my takeaways:
* Yegge claims that a real corner was turned last November, in terms of what models like Claude Opus could do vs the earlier stuff. I'm currently nursing a theory that says, there might be a qualitative difference between those "$200/mo" models vs the "$20/mo" models that both the naysayers and the CEO types have been messing with, which has increased the skepticism in the first camp (as they run into limits) but with CEOs empowered enough to build cool stuff and not getting bothered by the MVP/prototype level of what they make. (I don't think Scott agrees with my analysis, but anyway) But Yegge says stuff like the long vaunted "10x Programmer" is now actually unlocked.
* Yegge points out that this AI-driven 10x mode is actually exhausting (hence the title of the piece) I'm guessing coding with AI takes a significant part of the fraction of doing it "by hand". It's a more concentrated set of demands and focus.
* and So we have a classic "where does the value go" situation. If the company tries to get 10x the work all the time, endless go-go-go mode, that's just a recipe for burnout. Conversely, if it's more like employees just put in 1/10 the effort, that's a plan to get swamped by competitors who are increasing their productivity. Yegge thinks its crucial we find a balance for the value capture.
And so I'm working but wondering what the rest of my career looks like - and where I am on the bellcurve of adoption...