Define "it" in the context of "doing it wrong".

The post provides a lot of good food for thought based on experience which is exactly what the title conveys

A lot of these smells like skill issue on the model. So many are completely non-issues if using Claude Opus 4.5+

The idea of assigning a code-owner agent per directory is really interesting. A2A (read: message passing and self-updating AGENTS.md files) might really shine there in some way.

Why have you used it for months now if you're not impressed?

Because I'm too lazy to unsubscribe. It's cheap so it's not high on my list of things to do, lol.

Get them to learn the fundamentals and understand them deeply just like they should/might have in the past.

They can do so at an accelerated rate using AI on verifiable subject matter. Use something like SRS + copilot + nano (related: https://srs.voxos.ai) to really internalize concepts.

Go deep on a project while using AI. To what extreme can they take a program before AI can't offer a working solution? Professors should explore and guide their students to this boundary.

Obligatory reference to "The illustrated guide to a Ph.D." - https://matt.might.net/articles/phd-school-in-pictures/

I've been building on a platform called "The Jobs Index" as a centralized way to understand: 1. Task-based automation risks 2. Real-time layoff trends 3. Most/least resilient occupations 4. Outlook of the job market over the next 10 years

While the layoffs data is starting to look scary, corporate policy and regulation will very likely lead to an explosion of HIL jobs.

Andrej Karpathy (https://x.com/karpathy) released (and then removed?) a cursory analysis on ~300 occupations, but JTI tracks over 600 across BLS and O*NET data.

One of the things that's becoming clear is that job security will map to lack of verifiability in a given subject matter. That's somewhat concerning.

Fun! I came up with a similar concept - except you can only type in one word at a time. It discourages self-editing while also not being as extreme as exploding text.

https://flow.voxos.ai/

That's an interesting constraint. I also like that the blurred words stay visible — I can see how much I've written in real time. Thanks for sharing.

I built this because I'm fascinated by the word embeddings. The simple, canonical (?) example of king - man + woman = queen is such an accessible concept.

I figured that an LLM (Claude Opus 4.6) could extend the concept to apply to a number of mathemtics topics and it did!

There's an aspect to this which I feel could really help people who are not mathematically inclined to really internalize core conepts to the point that actual math makes more sense to them.

Appreciate any feedback I can get on it!

Opus 4.6 overthinks and burns tokens in my experience. I switched back to 4.5 after just the first two tasks.

Why would I want it to "think" more than it apparently needs to with 4.5.

I think the thinking mode is a net negative in a significant number of cases. I've had an issue in a file that claude failed to mention in the regular output but thought about and then dismissed out of hand in thinking.

As I automate more and more of my agentic coding process, I've come to realize that a swipe-based UX is very likely to dominate corporate decision making in the years to come.

The posted link is a research report on the topic - in full disclosure generated by a custom research agent I've been working on.

I'm sure that others are working on other novel UXs for fast decision making to coordinate their agents. I'd love to hear any insights you've gained so far.

I've worked in governance for the last 15 years. Based on that experience, nobody truly cares about the UX to signify a decision. They care about the communication of the information to make the decision in the first place. So you might be right, but you are focusing on something that is fairly irrelevant. If you want to innovate in the boardroom, innovate on information flow.

Why would agents use skills without being asked? Isn't that the point of tools and system prompts?