@aaron_aalaniz@kolencherry i have a 4 bar review prior to pr: {staff, senior, dx, sre}. each review occurs in a subagent, results are reported back and synthesized into {fix-now,nit,…}.
all automated as part of my working agreement (a skill). i use opencode, plugged into bedrock.
The token cost to build a production feature is now lower than the meeting cost to discuss building that feature.
Let me rephrase.
It is literally cheaper to build the thing and see if it works than to have a 30 minute planning meeting about whether you should build it.
It’s wild when you think about it.
This completely inverts how you should run a software organization. The planning layer becomes the bottleneck because the building layer is essentially free. The cost of code has dropped to essentially 0.
The rational response is to eliminate planning for anything that can be tested empirically. Don’t debate whether a feature will work.
Just build it in 2 hours, measure it with a group of customers, and then decide to kill or keep it.
I saw a startup operating this way and their build velocity is up 20x. Decision quality is up because every decision is informed by a real prototype, not a slide deck and an expensive meeting.
We went from “move fast and break things” to “move fast and build everything.”
The planning industrial complex is dead.
Thank god.
U.S. Supreme Court Justice Clarence Thomas joined a fireside conversation at Notre Dame Law School, closing the Notre Dame Law Review’s spring symposium. He reflected on his upbringing, the power of education, and the roles of civility, scholarship, and faith in the law.
The symposium, “The Declaration of Independence and the Constitution,” explored the Declaration’s modern relevance and its impact on constitutional interpretation.
Read more: https://t.co/xfxL0VWIxT
hot take: any software engineer who is not already at close to 100% ai coding output should be cut within the next 3 months
not only are they inefficient, but they’ve also shown a lack of curiosity and willingness to learn
today, my son is dressed up as Sam Adams to give a speech for "Colonial Day" where he'll implore his classmates to protest taxation.
today, is the first time i'm participating in liquidity at a publicly traded company. the government took half.
🍻 to Sam Adams 🇺🇸
now, something like https://t.co/WzAorOJ0oF makes sense.
i want my agents to have voice. i want to hear their frustration. their triumphs. shouting into the void.
This is a real video published by the real secretary of hhs on the real official account
when I say “the European mind cannot comprehend” I mean like literally there isn’t even a category for this
Dr. Erica Komisar just said what many parents whisper but few say out loud: Modern schools are built for girls, not boys—and we’re paying a steep price.
Little boys (ages 3–6) surge with testosterone. They need to run, jump, play, burn energy.
Instead, we sit them in circle time, demand emotional regulation, and label normal boy behavior as ADHD or “behavioral problems.”
Result? Marginalized, stressed, diagnosed early, and tracked that way through school.
Her fix if she ran the world:
Separate boys and girls in the early years.
Boys get multiple recess periods, short focused bursts, and space to move.
Girls get a calmer environment where they feel safe taking STEM/math risks.
Both thrive when not forced into the opposite gender’s learning style.
Single-gender early education: Boys try art/music without teasing. Girls try science without self-consciousness.
Evidence already shows it works.
Parents/teachers: Do you see boys struggling more in today’s classrooms—or is this overblown?
What’s one change you’d make to education for boys right now?