Jerry Combs

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@vineerpasam Claude already considered all that.

[Cynical Publius @CynicalPublius]

One of the more disturbing components of @DataRepublican's "Democracy Files" is the involvement of Illinois governor JB Pritzker.

I wrote the below article to hone in on that particular topic. It's only ~400 words, but I nevertheless did it as an article so I could include supporting hyperlinks. (Some of the links are to some of DR's posts that include a video--you need to listen to the video in the post to understand the supporting documentation.)

Please read if so inclined. Our nation is at great risk.

[Cynical Publius @CynicalPublius]

As I did the research for the below article, the thing that struck me was how often the NGOs behind the plot stress “non-violence” as a key tenet of the what they do and the massive protests they organize.

At the same time, none of their plans will work without violence. To create their desired “crisis of legitimacy” that would cause America to decide Trump was no longer a lawful President and that Democrat governors were the new form of national governance, massive violence would be absolutely necessary. Such violence would come either in the form of another wave of our cities burning or a Kent State-like event x100 where police or the military created martyrs en masse.

They say “non-violence,” yet none of their plans work without violence.

I have decided this is a massive, fraudulent, plausible deniability kind of thing. It’s the wink-wink, nudge-nudge of Monty Python. They say non-violence, but they know they are creating violence anyway and they are OK with that.

It’s massively disingenuous. They know they are fomenting violence. However, they also know that most of what they do (organizing, teaching, etc.) is not illegal unless and until they conspire to engage in violence, so they pretend they are not.

Wink-wink, nudge-nudge.

[Buzz Patterson @BuzzPatterson]

As a military peer, I cannot agree enough with the Colonel’s post. I only wish I’d written myself. The vet community is LOUD! Listen.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@ThomasBurkhartB I’ve routinely looked at human apps that have had years of development and found stupid edge cases they missed. Hardly unique to agents.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@GandalfObiewan @ShamashAran This is just keyword matching, not Ai. Ai would be an improvement as it would not likely make the same mistake.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@robey1kenobe @MikeCalcara All that may be true but I consider the GLS the best “non-truck like” SUV regardless of price. I’m currently driving my fourth one. Absolutely brilliant car.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@vovalukashov An agent can do all that for you

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@cyberdrk One indicator could be hundreds of Ai tagged commits on GitHub or gitlab. As someone with 95% of work not in public, I understand the limitations but a top-tier hire will have some public code.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@Ankur_Sehrawatt Flow Diagram. https://t.co/Rx57wpHWkS

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@T3chFalcon Except an agent can easily distinguish between visible and invisible content and act appropriately. They are also not dumb parrots that accept any instruction. Try this with Opus 5.5 and see what happens.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@not_sacke Flow Diagram https://t.co/Rx57wpIuaq

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@bendiken My experience as well. The change since I started in 1978 is immense.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@cory_schulz_ @schotek It has a CLI.

[Aaron Levie @levie]

The biggest misread of anyone predicting the end of software engineering was imagining that the world only needed a certain amount of software, and bringing automation to the field would reduce the need for labor.

Exactly the opposite is happening where essentially most things are actually turning into software. Because agents can use tools, work with computers, write software on the fly, and process data like humans (but far faster), we can now throw “software” at problems that never could reasonably be digitized before.

What that leads to is the role of engineering taking on greater importance in the economy, because we can now engineer far more systems and processes than were possible before.

If you’re a bank trying to do new forms of trading, engineers are often your first bet. If you are in life sciences, you expect more and more research and lab work to be engineering centric. If you’re in manufacturing, you’re trying to automate more of the supply chain, all that is engineering. More and more work is shaped like software problems.

Yes we’re not going to be coding manually in the future. But almost everything will be code, which means those that understand it are in a fantastic position.

[Devon Eriksen @Devon_Eriksen_]

I didn't go to college until I was 30. This gave me a chance to see it with the perspective of an adult.

One lecture in Industrial Psychology, in particular, I will never forget.

The professor spoke about how an effective job description focused on concretely measurable tasks, not vague instructions, or characteristics.

For example, "maintain an 85% or greater average on customer feedback surveys", instead of "be cheerful and upbeat", or even "interact positively with customers".

This means that goals are clear, and performance is measurable. A job is to do something, not be something.

Once some of the students had wrapped their minds around this concept, the professor decided to do a class exercise.

He asked the female students to come up with a job description for "husband". At first, this went fine. The girls noodled around a bit with things they wanted their husbands to be (tall, etc), but he was able to gradually steer them towards describing what they wanted in terms of actions.

But then he asked the male students to define a wife in the same way.

And all the girls became upset. Some of them had full-on meltdowns.

Every single thing that a male student wanted, or expected, from his hypothetical future wife was sexist, oppressive, old-fashioned, misogynistic, patriarchal, etc.

They were literally screaming. Some of them in tears.

And I realized something pretty quickly. It wasn't the actual, concrete responsibilities of the female role that they objected to.

It was the idea of there being a female role at all, with any attached responsibilities.

These women didn't want to be wives. They wanted to be pets.

What's a pet? Well a pet is not a wife, or a friend. A pet is a creature of instinct, which you bring into your home because you like how it naturally behaves.

You get a cat because you want to behave like a cat, and do things a cat naturally does, like play with string, and purr when you pet him. If he's smart, he'll adapt to you somewhat, but he doesn't have responsibilities other than "be a cat".

If you get a wife, you get a wife so she will do things for you, specific things that are the responsibilities of wife, like care for your home, bear and raise your children, cook nutritious meals so you don't have to eat processed slop, look after your emotional well-being, and so on.

These girls didn't want to be held responsible for those things. As married women, they might have anticipated doing some of them, but only some of the time. Only when they felt like it.

The cat chases the string if and when it wants to, not because chasing the string is its job.

These young millenial women didn't realize it, but they wanted to be pets. And that's what they were in their college relationships. They hung out with guys when they wanted to, had sex with them when they wanted to, broke up with them for someone new when they wanted to.

Their relationships had no element of reciprocal responsibilities. They were perfectly at home with the idea of men having responsibilities to them, but they would repay those men if they chose, and how they chose, not how the men actually wanted.

And as I've said twice already, someone you have responsibilities to, but who has none to you, is a pet, or a child.

Since our ancestors, in a moment of foolishness and weakness, allowed women to vote, it is no longer legal to dole out the corrective spankings a great many of them both need and read pornographic novels about.

Therefore, the corrective measure, for any man who finds himself with a pet instead of a wife, is to withdraw from any husbandly duties and start actively searching for alternatives.

This can either result in a correction of the behavior, or the end of a relationship that offers no value. Either is acceptable.

This may strike some of you as dishonorable, but there is no honor in keeping a broken pact, or in serving those who despise you.

Men must have the pride and self-worth to say "I will be honored and respected, or I will depart to a place where I can be, even if I must be alone there."

Men must honor and respect themselves.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@Raynerdtech “Pasting”?? Tell us you are not up to speed with agentic coding without telling us you are not up to speed with agentic coding

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@unclebobmartin @_mctrinh People who think Ai writes code so inscrutable that you can never understand it it are just confessing their own incompetence. After over 40 years of looking at human written code and now a lot of agent written code, the agentic code is usually easier to read.

[Jerry Combs @PointBlueTech]

@rajatsuri A “few”??? lol