Nah, because everyone is an expert sometimes. They don't listen and you gotta let them touch the hot stove. Sometimes there's not much you can do. Sometimes people trust in random blog posts or now AI more than the people they work with. So unless you can get through to them with an idea that isn't your own... You gotta let them touch that stove.

Just going to be brutally honest - we lost the art of software design and architecture. Clean code is pretty much dead. As someone who has contributed to many OSS projects and built frameworks...I just don't see this anymore. All of my colleagues have moved on. Conferences used to be full of great info and research, but the story flipped there. Now they are all about marketing, treating speakers like crap, not willing to cover various expenses because they believe they are doing the speaker a favor. Also factor in the industry supply and demand issues and desire to just "move fast and break things" and voila - we have a lot of really bad software.

I mean the supply and demand problem was so bad that you had people so narrowly focused that their expectations were absolutely wild. Expecting wild titles out of college or practically out of college. How many "senior" engineers are there who have 3 years of experience or less? How many principals? CTOs? Tons. It's wild and a horrible expectation. Then this cohort of people couldn't possibly fathom actually learning and putting in time so they attacked the people who were simply around longer. I guess ageism but really that naive and toxic phrase you'd hear all over "jack of all trades, master of none." People just couldn't get over the fact that others knew more than a week's worth of YouTube content...and I get it, the large companies hired many people to do one specific job. It's just how the industry supported the insane demand. You "specialize" ... If you want to call it that. As a result, I do not often hire people from large companies because they expect way too much money and do far too little.

So all of this is to say quality has fallen off a cliff and very few know any better. It's really a result of industry demand.

I think many senior engineers let bad projects fail because they don't actually know how to save them. But yes, I'm agree, there's also no incentive.

Here's where I love AI. I'm hoping that AI can help fill some skill gaps, provide education, and separate the people who have motivation from those who don't. At the end of the day, I hate to say it - many engineers took advantage of people. Maybe not intentionally of course, it what was the market would bear. I think AI is going to put an end to the gravy train and as a programmer of over 20 years? I'm thrilled.

Will AI prevent bad projects though? No. Because we still have the same problems. Few programmers are going to plan, communicate, and even bother to put forth the effort to ask about software design. They're going to crank out AI slop.

You know my bet? My bet is that product minded people who didn't understand coding will end up out performing most programmers. In fact, the more junior people on my team absolutely shred many of the "senior" programmers. So much so that I'm faced with a very very difficult gut wrenching challenge. Upskill the "senior" programmers or let them go, because it's just bad for the business when you just look at the numbers. I wouldn't be doing my job and be protecting the company if one of those two outcomes didn't happen. I'm not going to protect people who don't want to lift a finger.

A great reckoning is coming. I think there's going to be a Renaissance from an unexpected cohort of people who will produce good projects again. It won't be the "senior" programmers.

It's going well in terms of being a valuable tool. It's not going well from an economic point of view. There's going to be winners and losers in this bubble. Things will settle and it will be commonplace technology in the future. Not going anywhere. It's just over hyped right now.

Then you consider the massive spend in data centers, the ram shortage, etc. The writing is on the wall.

Not a very valuable one. Never had been. That's the funny part. So many people want software but then don't know what to do once they have it.

Get tested. Get it treated. It could change your life. No joke. It's not a big deal. I know there's a stigma, but really, it's not a big deal. 15%+ of the population has it. Just go get it checked out. Promise.

I think their only profitable horse is Claude Code. That's the reason for the control.

But that means they lose on inference. Which isn't good.

Here's one thing I'm a little nervous about, because it doesn't make sense to cut off distribution channels.

Anthropic should be profitable from the inference alone. That's their product...but they (like others) aren't.

This makes some sense now why they want to control usage/distribution. I bet they have a very good chunk of subscribers to Claude Code who aren't using their credits. So they probably don't have any chance at being profitable without this. Not a great place to be.

Totally agree. It's like shooting yourself in the foot to remove distribution channels. They need to hire someone for growth over there.

Claude Code isn't a good as the other tools. The models are the attractive part about Anthropic. I love Opus 4.5, but won't ever use it with Claude Code. Ok... never is strong...I won't use it any time soon. It has a long ways to go. Might get there, we'll see.

I don't know, we hired a junior developer and are about to hire another. Not sure it collapsed. I just think it's really hard to get a job across the board right now.