From all possible concerns, "giving access to anthropic/openai" to your "secret sauce" is the least important one for 99% of the companies out there.
No, is not way better to simply write the code yourself. Most of the code is written faster and better with Claude Code or equivalent. Very niche code is better written by hand. Even then, you're probably better off nudging something like Claude Code in the direction you need it to go. There's nothing interesting about writing it yourself unless you're still learning to code (in which case is a learning exercise for you, not only about the outcome).
Not at all. Most people can be super happy with less than the average tech salary (at a point where they don't feel they need more if it comes at the expense of work life balance, time with family, job satisfaction, etc).
I’ll never understand this WHY X - BECAUSE Y - WELL Y IS TOO MUCH, Z IS MORE THAN ENOUGH comment trifecta. Obviously a lot of people are not super happy, otherwise they wouldn’t kiss asses and play politics to get more money.
It's funny cuz is true. Except it'd probably be one long design doc with 10 rounds of review, 15 CLs (PRs) and months of rollouts later ... fails A/B due to declining user engagement.
Quite frankly sounds super boring. I prefer driving than supervising. Only true unsupervised autonomous driving would be interesting for me (e.g Waymo).
An unsubstantiated claim given that there are many, many safe human drivers who have neither LIDAR sensors nor hyper-accurate pre-mapping at their disposal.
"today"? Are there not humans on the road today? There have been a number of safety issues with Waymos, certainly too many to describe them as the one true safe option, today.
Entertaining a No True Scotsmen is a bit of a silly exercise anyway, but this semantic game is extra silly.
The person you replied to was talking about how we can achieve safe autonomous driving today. When I remind you of that context, that your rebuttal is not actually rebutting what they said, I am not performing No True Scotsman.
The gap between humans and computers is enormous, not some weird gotcha tactic.
I literally rebutted that context. Waymos are not safe autonomous driving today, they have caused various safety issues in the era of "today". I didn't include "today" in my original comment because none of the available options are "the only true safe way to do it today", but I don't think it is constructive to just say that.
No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you.
"Waymos are not safe" could be a rebuttal to what they said. "There are many safe humans" is not a rebuttal to what they said. Your comment above was the latter.
> No True Scotsman was obviously in reference to GC, not you.
I'm unsure what they said that would qualify. Was it adding "true unsupervised"? I think that's a fair qualification, because most of the point of self driving is lost if I can't look away from the road.
Yes. Once is available more widely to common car owners (either from Waymo or others) that would interest me. Current Tesla supervised style semi autonomous driving I would find either boring or stressful (depending on the scenario). I would rather drive myself.
Note Waymo announced a partnership with Toyota, pretty hand wavy, but at least it seems there’s hope the technology may come to regular car owners at some point.
100% me ... we're on the same page ... I've said it before. I don't want to become my cars manager ... I want to enjoy my driving.
I get that the vast majority aren't car enthusiasts and that's ok, but there is actual pleasure in driving.
And even me - when I want a rest from it - lane assist and cruise control are MORE than enough. I can even add these two to old classics without much bother.
Going all in on autonomy doesn't interest me at all.
> What if your means are not sufficient to avoid hunger?
Not all advice is applicable to everyone. It's up to you to decide if you can and want to follow it. The advice was for young programmers and it is solid advice, but again, not applicable to everyone. It is applicable to a majority (probably even large majority). If you are young and earning a sw engineer salary it is very rare to not be able to cover your basic needs and have something left. Most people spends what is left in luxuries, lifestyle creep, etc; which is what the advice is trying to warn people about.
Do you mind sharing what big tech company? I've worked at both small companies and big tech. Managers do not have full control, but they can influence very significantly comp and evaluations. If your manager isn't doing it then it is a performance problem.
My understanding is that the definition of cult requires a common object of devotion. What's that object of devotion for "society"? it's too large and diverse of a group to categorize it as such IMHO. I agree however that sometimes people will categorize anything strongly deviating from the norm as cult-ish.
Engineering managers should not exist? I agree in an ideal world they shouldn’t. Ideally all teams should self-organize in harmony and dance barefoot singing kumbaya forming a perfect holacracy. Alas, we don’t live in an ideal world, and some people like me decided is a problem worth working on even if we don’t enjoy it as much as writing code.
No, is not way better to simply write the code yourself. Most of the code is written faster and better with Claude Code or equivalent. Very niche code is better written by hand. Even then, you're probably better off nudging something like Claude Code in the direction you need it to go. There's nothing interesting about writing it yourself unless you're still learning to code (in which case is a learning exercise for you, not only about the outcome).