Tushar 💭

tech lead/staff eng @serverlessguru • serverless • aws • typescript • node.js • YC21

[Lee Robinson @leerob]

Narrative violation: I built 80% of this project without any custom rules or commands or anything else.

I only added rules after the models got things wrong a few times. And only added a /command after I had figured out my workflow.

Don't try to optimize too early, just build!

[Chris @ChrissGPT]

Nobody knows what’s coming

A single person with an idea could act as the "CEO" of a 10,000-agent company in 2 years

You will have “software as a thought” not as a service. When you speak a billion instance "swarm" builds the backend, frontend, security, and scaling infrastructure in minutes.

The past 18 months have seen the most rapid pace of progress we’ve ever witnessed in the history of computer science.

I implore you to read about SWE pro. It was made to be contamination-resistant. I’ve yet to read a good reason why once we score 90-100% on this benchmark all of software engineering wouldn’t be solved. This is one of the most complex and difficultly designed benchmarks. The tasks are so long, the agent must be able to learn from its own failed test runs within the same session - essentially a model would have to have some form of continuous learning to beat this benchmark.

Gemini 2.5 preview scored 13%
Gemini 3 preview scored 43%

Claude Opus 4.5 is currently in the lead at 45% (according to scale ai) — YOU HAVE PEOPLE AT ANTHROPIC TELLING YOU THEY WATCH CLAUDE ALL DAY AND FILL IN GAPS.

Sure you can cry wolf that they’re incentivized to say it, but has your X timeline not for the last 2 weeks been constant shock about how good the models at coding are? Especially 4.5 Opus?

It is abundantly clear to me software engineering will be solved in 2 years. Even if you were to double, no TRIPLE that guess it would have a PROFOUND impact on the GDP and average American life

[Michigan TypeScript @MiTypeScript]

⚔️introducing TypeSlayer⚔️ A #typescript type performance benchmarking and analysis tool. A summation of everything learned from the benchmarking required to make the Doom project happen.

It's got MCP support, Perfetto, Speedscope, Treemap, duplicate package detection, and more.

[Haz @diegohaz]

Use the standard Node.js "imports" field instead of TypeScript aliases:

[Sam Altman @sama]

Codex is so good, and is going to get so amazing.

I am having a hard time imagining what creating software at the end of 2026 is going to look like.

[Jamie Birch @birch_js]

After 6+ years of failed experiments, it's finally working. Direct native API access from JS in React Native 🥹

Access the full iOS SDK – like a native dev.
Cross threads – like a native dev.

Today, my brother in JavaScript, you are a native dev.

[Jaana Dogan ヤナ ドガン @rakyll]

Google is desperate for TS developers more than ever. TS is becoming the go-to language following Python for AI developers.

[Dylan O'Sullivan @DylanoA4]

Still hard to believe that access to infinite information made us dumber

[Thariq @trq212]

The Claude Code SDK now supports custom tools and hooks directly in code.

Additionally, we’ve refreshed all our docs with complete references and 10 new guides on how to utilize the SDK.

[Jean-Michel Lemieux @jmwind]

The biggest drain on your team isn't the impossible challenges. It's the people who turn simple tasks into complex ones.

Keep the simplifiers. Avoid the complicators.

It's not easy to spot, often the complicators are seen as having a great attention to detail & high care.

But it's not that. It's inability to self-regulate on the right detail, the right problems, and the right effort. And their blast radius is hard to contain.

[Michael @michael_chomsky]

Literally 20 companies are lining up trying to hire this kind of person.

If this is you dm me and I'll introduce you to a founder.

[Tushar 💭 @TusharF5]

@sama smarter >>>>>> faster. time != money

[Tushar 💭 @TusharF5]

@icanvardar couldn’t agree more

[Corbin Crutchley @crutchcorn]

I'm hiring!

Come work with my team as a Senior Backend Engineer working with TypeScript & Node.js.

We're looking for someone with 5+ years in the industry that can help us foster our BE into something awesome.

We've got fairly flexible hours, a great team, good comp. DMs open

[Sam Selikoff @samselikoff]

I'm looking for a React/Next.js dev for an awesome contract position with Together AI. It's 40h/week and you get to work on fun AI demos to showcase off new features from OSS models like DeepSeek when they drop!

DM me if you or someone you know is interested!

[Tushar 💭 @TusharF5]

@jiratickets he is no longer your manager 😬

[Marco Ippolito @satanacchio]

You can sponsor my work on the Node.js TypeScript integration. It's not part of my job, its very time consuming.
I have received so far ~300$ mostly from @antfu7
If you benefit from it do the right thing 👇
https://t.co/TtpzMCeAdO

[Tushar 💭 @TusharF5]

@benln 👋

[Indian Doctor🇮🇳 @Indian__doctor]

Stand for Her 🔥
#justiceformoumitadebnath

[Thiago Ghisi @thiagoghisi]

What are the Recurring Expectations for Achieving Staff-Plus Level Across Tech Companies, and Where do Senior Engineers Most Often Fall Short?
These are the 3 things I found that, if you do consistency, will make you golden as a Staff-Plus Engineer at pretty much any company. These are also the 3 most common expectations I have seen across the board for Staff Engineers. And by coincidence or not, these are also the 3 things I've seeing struggling Senior Engineers completely neglecting or being completely unaware of.

Here is my answer based on my last 8 years of experience on the Management track both as an EM and as a Director.

1️⃣ Blast radius:

There is this idea that you need to have a wide impact. As a staff, the impact should go beyond a single group or beyond a single project. There is, on the other side, this idea that you should be technically excellent. You should go deep, and you're the person that knows the most about the topic.
(Side-note: @alexewerlof wrote a fantastic article on this called "Beyond Staff Engineer")

I actually believe the mistake a lot of people make is that they go so deep on the technical expertise that they forget the organizational surface expectation, or what I call the blast radius of impact of what they are doing. In my view, yes, technical depth is important. We're going to see on part two of my talk, on the behaviors on why that's important. But, where I see a lot of people dropping the ball is on the blast radius, in terms of impacting the broad organization.
The reason why I chose blast radius, and not only like high impact, is because there are different shapes of blast radius. You can have an impact on something that's deep, something that almost changes how a product line works. Or, you can create a new platform, a new library or something that is going to make everybody else more productive, all the engineers are going to know who you are or the tool, the innovation you made. Blast radius is the thing that you have to keep in mind in this expectation for staff-plus. If you are working on a project that's only affecting a single repo, and not everybody is or will be knowing about that thing soon, is usually a red flag.

On High-Blast Radius, I honestly don't care how technical you are; I care about the blast radius impact of what you work on. It can be a blast radius that is super wide and affects the whole company, or it can be super deep in one area that almost revolutionizes how the product or the product line operates and has profound implications on that particular business area. On both angles, that impacted the company as a whole if you were able to fundamentally change how things were done in a product or product line; although your impact can be considered contained in that area, it impacted the revenue or the cost structure or the customer experience of the whole company. So keep that in mind; even small but deep blast radii are high-blast radii if you look from business eyes into that.

...continue...

🧵