> A tool is not meant to be the object of our attention; rather the tool should reveal the true object of our attention (the thing the tool acts upon), rather than obscuring it

I think this is true of AI agents. What is the object of our engineering attention? Applications, features, defect resolution. Not code.

Author here: yeah, this is a good point and something I think about even outside the context of agentic coding.

I've also tinkered with this idea myself in the context of prompt engineering with my Grace Browser project (https://trygrace.dev/), which converts code to an equivalent dynamic web form live within your browser.

I do think it's useful to remember that code is not the end goal and is itself just another mediated interface to the actual goal: the product your building. However, I think even if you cut code out of the picture the chat interface is still not necessarily the right interface for building a product. A great example of how to build a non-chat interface to product building (predating the AI boom) is Bret Victor's Inventing on Principle talk (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=PUv66718DII) and there might be ways we can refresh the ideas in that talk for the AI era (although I still don't have any specific thoughts along those lines yet).

Totally agree about the chat interface. I like to say it’s “infinitely powerful and infinitely confusing.” A dangerous combination. And, arguing with myself, I think it’s fair to say the code is AN object of our attention, if not THE object. A common metaphor being applied to agentic coding is the invention of power tools. If AI is the drill, and the goal is a house, then the code is the framing.

They have a monolith but struggle with individual subsystem failures bringing down the whole thing. Sounds like they would benefit from Elixir’s isolated, fail-fast architecture.

That’s true, and it’s still more reliable for useful information than the top results on Google.

> I was being exposed to engineering concepts that just weren't a thing in agency work: unit testing, CI/CD, git hygiene, release management.

As someone who’s worked at an agency that’s grown from twenty engineers to hundreds over the last five years, what? Even when we were small and scrappy we still wrote unit tests…

My experience was 100% different (but also 6+ years ago). Margins just weren't enough to build it into estimates and it was nearly impossible to sell it to clients as a line item.

It won’t be only for the disadvantaged.

“Tending bar” puts more emphasis on what one might argue is the more important part of the phrase. No one is there for the tender. Consider versus “woodworking”: you want the work, not the hunk of wood.

Both. Unknowingly usually means uncaringly. And the FDA clearly has duty to thoroughly test products.

We need a publicly funded body whose purpose is to issue grants for firms to reproduce scientific findings. A scientific reproduction corps. Extra can be awarded for finding flawed/fraudulent research. This would create a community of organizations that counter-balance industry incentives and instill trust in our scientific process.

Activation via Pegasus spyware will not be overt

Would you still have, if you knew the strings that would come attached? Tracking your every move? Enabling governments to surreptitiously snoop on your audio and camera? Constant exposure to experiences designed to addict and immiserate you?

I think it's good that people are aware of the downsides to everyone-has-a-smartphone and I'm glad there are people like Snowden who have made us all very aware of that. And I think it's good people are trying to find ways to avoid the downsides.

But I also think it's easy to take all the incredible benefits for-granted and only see the downsides. I remember what it was like 30 years ago and I much prefer now. Do you remember having to go to a physical location (library or town hall) to look things up? Basically no-one bothered and we all blundered around believing whatever some bloke in the pub had told us about.

We all have the world in our pocket now and it's amazing.

(Yes we have the problem of bubbles and misinformation but I still think information abundance wins out over information drought)

The number of people who carry smartphones around means the answer to this is almost certainly yes.

Also no one snoops on your audio or camera despite the paranoia around it, there's no need to. You can get all the info you need much more efficiently and accurately other ways.

> The number of people who carry smartphones around means the answer to this is almost certainly yes.

Maybe they have no other real choice? This discussion is full of such cases.

So, maybe, the washing machine could have a... web page? No proprietary app store (where the app disappears when not updated to support the new OS version), no installation, usable from any device?