Users don't want changes that rapidly. There's not enough people on the product team to design 20x more features. 20x more features means 400x more cross-team coordination. There's only positive marginal ROI for maybe 1.5-2x even if development is very cheap.
You just copy paste as in you copy paste all the necessary context and the results. You don't give it access to your codebase for read or write, correct?
> You don't give it access to your codebase for read or write, correct?
I'm sure you can derive some benefit without doing that, but you're not going to see much of a speedup if you're still copy/pasting and manually prompting after each change. If anybody is copy/pasting and saying "I don't get it", yeah you don't.
Stock trading can be quite lucrative if it's a good match. Have a look at Qullamaggie on YouTube.
> Edit, I say this as someone that has been learning to trade the last 6 months. To be completely transparent I've actually overall lost money doing this, but have also brought my account back up from having halved to almost break even a couple times now and can definitely see the possibility of doing very well. If I was better at following instructions I would 100% be profitable. The YouTuber I mentioned doesn't sell any courses.
> Edit 2, screw you guys for the downvotes. I'm sharing something I've found useful. You don't have to buy into the idea, but there are some people who do very well off of trading. Hence "if it's a match"
Stock "trading" is statistically against the odds. "A Random Walk Down Wall Street" was published nearly 50 years ago and remains generally true. No YouTuber or perfect instruction following would make you 100% likely to be profitable.
The most profitable (and effort efficient way) is to routinely invest in a broad basket of stocks over a long period. Ie Voo and Hold.
Moreover if you can get an edge that is even 2-3% over a coin flip all you need is risk management to make money.
Not understanding this is how you go broke. I traded for a number of years and did well. It was not hard to regularly beat the market, especially in futures and options.
I've seen people on tiktok that exclusively trade options. It's not something I've looked into but my take after 6 months is that you basically find an approach that works for you, whether that be trading stocks, commodities, options etc and the time-scale that you trade.
Personally I like to do primarily tech stocks and mix it up doing swing trading (holding multiple days) with a bit of scalping as well (buy / sells over minutes).
At first I lost a lot of money scalping but now I seem to have a much higher success rate - you start to notice certain patterns in the way stocks move if you watch the charts long enough, and I've been learning to have more conviction in my positions.
Yes, I might consider doing this but need to consistently feel confident doing it manually first. I did set up a docker instance to connect to my broker, so perhaps a goal for this year!
I'm not downvoting you, but I think you are probably getting downvoted because "Stock trading can be quite lucrative" is statistically just not true. Even professional financial advisors almost never beat the market [0]. Only hedge funds that pay for huge amounts of priveledged financial information do, and even then not always.
Here's a good video that makes a case for this. Even if you don't agree, you might find some of the points he makes interesting.
But tl;dr, he argues that index funds basically always outperform other methods, so one should primarily invest in things like that.
No offense intended, just speaking by the numbers you shared above, but it sounds like you are at the lower end of the bell curve. Most day traders are, largely because they don't have access to priveledged information like the datasets that hedge funds buy. If they make better bets than you do, then they literally take your money. Those aren't good odds.
I'm at the lower end in the same way that a junior dev is at the lower end of the salary band. This is to be expected for anyone just starting out.
You're assuming that you need privileged information that is not available, but what I'm trading is basically the big player moves - indicated by movement volume in a stock.
You don't need all the info, there are emergent patterns that result for stocks that make big moves over time.
Not every stock that matches one of these patterns will be a winner, but you can base a strategy around this that allows you to have enough success, especially when you combine this with other attributes of the stock (and market conditions) at the particular point in time.
I'm openly aware that so far I'm in the negative. However most of this is due to me not having sold when instructed to (holding onto "favourite" stocks). Very close to break even currently, so no harm done after 6 months playing in the market.
Anyone care to give their take on Quantum Computing?
Does it have practical application? Are we actually progressing towards something or are research papers just a way to get the next grant in order to continue playing with Quantum?
I posted this as a submission that didn't really garner interest but from the cryptanalysis angle it is a boondoggle, here's a video of Peter Gutmann presenting his take: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xa4Ok7WNFHY
Likely will work but it doesn't have a "killer app" yet so less funding than needed.
My understanding is that programming it is like building a house of cards so that when it falls the pile at the end is an answer. Very different way of thinking and there's no nice abstraction layers.
Needs more reliability and and something equivalent to a compiler and C programming.
> the main known applications of quantum computers remain (1) the simulation of quantum physics and chemistry themselves, (2) breaking a lot of currently deployed cryptography, and (3) eventually, achieving some modest benefits for optimization, machine learning, and other areas (but it will probably be a while before those modest benefits win out in practice).
...
> 2025 was clearly a year that met or exceeded my expectations on hardware, with multiple platforms now boasting >99.9% fidelity two-qubit gates, at or above the theoretical threshold for fault-tolerance. This year updated me in favor of taking more seriously the aggressive pronouncements—the “roadmaps”—of Google, Quantinuum, QuEra, PsiQuantum, and other companies about where they could be in 2028 or 2029.
...
> at some point, the people doing detailed estimates of how many physical qubits and gates it’ll take to break actually deployed cryptosystems using Shor’s algorithm are going to stop publishing those estimates, if for no other reason than the risk of giving too much information to adversaries. Indeed, for all we know, that point may have been passed already. This is the clearest warning that I can offer in public right now about the urgency of migrating to post-quantum cryptosystems, a process that I’m grateful is already underway.
Perhaps there are some people like you say that are grandiose narcissists and ALSO some people that are genuinely smarter than most others in the room and can see the obvious through the fog.
I think the frustration they're experiencing is more likely to do with a lack of control over their environment (including the lack of ability to control others).
I wish we could pin down not only the model but also the way the UI works as well.
Last week Claude seemed to have a shift in the way it works. The way it summarises and outputs its results is different. For me it's gotten worse. Slower, worse results, more confusing narrowing down what actually changed etc etc.
Long story short, I wish I was able to checkpoint the entire system and just revert to how it was previously. I feel like it had gotten to a stage where I felt pretty satisfied, and whatever got changed ... I just want it reverted!
I agree, much slower and worse output. It is substantially worse now than it was weeks ago.
It spends a lot of time coming up with “UI options” (Select 1, 2 or 3 with a TUI interface) for me to consider when it could just ask me what I want, not come up with a 5 layer flow chart of possibilities.
Overall I think it is just Anthropic tweaking things to reduce costs.
I am paying for a Max subscription but I am going to reevaluate other options.
He's probably right that no-one else can do what he can, because competent Devs aren't going to work for a company that operates like this.
If you have to build something because "Devs are too busy working on other things", then you're just bad at prioritising tasks.
If your team "can't do what I can" then you're bad at hiring.
I don't mind if a CTO works on a bug ticket, but make it part of the usual process, not hero driven development. Otherwise, what's even the point of having a process in the first place?!
reply