Causal Coder retweeted
- Drafted a blog post
- Used an LLM to meticulously improve the argument over 4 hours.
- Wow, feeling great, it’s so convincing!
- Fun idea let’s ask it to argue the opposite.
- LLM demolishes the entire argument and convinces me that the opposite is in fact true.
- lol
The LLMs may elicit an opinion when asked but are extremely competent in arguing almost any direction. This is actually super useful as a tool for forming your own opinions, just make sure to ask different directions and be careful with the sycophancy.
Causal Coder retweeted
The older I get, the more I realize intelligence is overrated. Intelligent people are more likely to overthink, overplan, and overanalyze. They hide behind motion that doesn't create progress. They fear the judgment of others if they're proven wrong.
The truth is that intelligence is abundant. Courage is not. The people you admire are the ones who had the courage to act. They aren’t more talented than you. They aren’t smarter than you. They just took action when you didn’t.
I often wonder how many extraordinary people wasted their entire lives waiting for permission that never came. Permission isn't granted. It's taken. You get to tap yourself in whenever you want. You can just do things.
Courage beats intelligence.
Causal Coder retweeted
This AI System Design guide teaches RAG better than most courses.
And I'm giving it away for free (Only for First 4500)
Inside:
• RAG fundamentals & chunking strategies
• Hybrid retrieval (BM25 + vector search)
• Production-level RAG architecture
• Evaluation & RAGAS metrics
• Hallucination reduction techniques
• End-to-end LLM system design
How to get it:
• Follow me (must so I can DM)
• RT + Like
• Comment "book"
I'll dm you
Causal Coder retweeted
Today AI Video stops being slop.
Introducing Wondercraft Video, an AI video studio built for real work.
Create explainer videos, trainings, product launches, ads, and more by describing what you want.
RT and comment “WONDA” and I’ll DM you 1,000 free credits.
Causal Coder retweeted
A few random notes from claude coding quite a bit last few weeks.
Coding workflow. Given the latest lift in LLM coding capability, like many others I rapidly went from about 80% manual+autocomplete coding and 20% agents in November to 80% agent coding and 20% edits+touchups in December. i.e. I really am mostly programming in English now, a bit sheepishly telling the LLM what code to write... in words. It hurts the ego a bit but the power to operate over software in large "code actions" is just too net useful, especially once you adapt to it, configure it, learn to use it, and wrap your head around what it can and cannot do. This is easily the biggest change to my basic coding workflow in ~2 decades of programming and it happened over the course of a few weeks. I'd expect something similar to be happening to well into double digit percent of engineers out there, while the awareness of it in the general population feels well into low single digit percent.
IDEs/agent swarms/fallability. Both the "no need for IDE anymore" hype and the "agent swarm" hype is imo too much for right now. The models definitely still make mistakes and if you have any code you actually care about I would watch them like a hawk, in a nice large IDE on the side. The mistakes have changed a lot - they are not simple syntax errors anymore, they are subtle conceptual errors that a slightly sloppy, hasty junior dev might do. The most common category is that the models make wrong assumptions on your behalf and just run along with them without checking. They also don't manage their confusion, they don't seek clarifications, they don't surface inconsistencies, they don't present tradeoffs, they don't push back when they should, and they are still a little too sycophantic. Things get better in plan mode, but there is some need for a lightweight inline plan mode. They also really like to overcomplicate code and APIs, they bloat abstractions, they don't clean up dead code after themselves, etc. They will implement an inefficient, bloated, brittle construction over 1000 lines of code and it's up to you to be like "umm couldn't you just do this instead?" and they will be like "of course!" and immediately cut it down to 100 lines. They still sometimes change/remove comments and code they don't like or don't sufficiently understand as side effects, even if it is orthogonal to the task at hand. All of this happens despite a few simple attempts to fix it via instructions in CLAUDE . md. Despite all these issues, it is still a net huge improvement and it's very difficult to imagine going back to manual coding. TLDR everyone has their developing flow, my current is a small few CC sessions on the left in ghostty windows/tabs and an IDE on the right for viewing the code + manual edits.
Tenacity. It's so interesting to watch an agent relentlessly work at something. They never get tired, they never get demoralized, they just keep going and trying things where a person would have given up long ago to fight another day. It's a "feel the AGI" moment to watch it struggle with something for a long time just to come out victorious 30 minutes later. You realize that stamina is a core bottleneck to work and that with LLMs in hand it has been dramatically increased.
Speedups. It's not clear how to measure the "speedup" of LLM assistance. Certainly I feel net way faster at what I was going to do, but the main effect is that I do a lot more than I was going to do because 1) I can code up all kinds of things that just wouldn't have been worth coding before and 2) I can approach code that I couldn't work on before because of knowledge/skill issue. So certainly it's speedup, but it's possibly a lot more an expansion.
Leverage. LLMs are exceptionally good at looping until they meet specific goals and this is where most of the "feel the AGI" magic is to be found. Don't tell it what to do, give it success criteria and watch it go. Get it to write tests first and then pass them. Put it in the loop with a browser MCP. Write the naive algorithm that is very likely correct first, then ask it to optimize it while preserving correctness. Change your approach from imperative to declarative to get the agents looping longer and gain leverage.
Fun. I didn't anticipate that with agents programming feels *more* fun because a lot of the fill in the blanks drudgery is removed and what remains is the creative part. I also feel less blocked/stuck (which is not fun) and I experience a lot more courage because there's almost always a way to work hand in hand with it to make some positive progress. I have seen the opposite sentiment from other people too; LLM coding will split up engineers based on those who primarily liked coding and those who primarily liked building.
Atrophy. I've already noticed that I am slowly starting to atrophy my ability to write code manually. Generation (writing code) and discrimination (reading code) are different capabilities in the brain. Largely due to all the little mostly syntactic details involved in programming, you can review code just fine even if you struggle to write it.
Slopacolypse. I am bracing for 2026 as the year of the slopacolypse across all of github, substack, arxiv, X/instagram, and generally all digital media. We're also going to see a lot more AI hype productivity theater (is that even possible?), on the side of actual, real improvements.
Questions. A few of the questions on my mind:
- What happens to the "10X engineer" - the ratio of productivity between the mean and the max engineer? It's quite possible that this grows *a lot*.
- Armed with LLMs, do generalists increasingly outperform specialists? LLMs are a lot better at fill in the blanks (the micro) than grand strategy (the macro).
- What does LLM coding feel like in the future? Is it like playing StarCraft? Playing Factorio? Playing music?
- How much of society is bottlenecked by digital knowledge work?
TLDR Where does this leave us? LLM agent capabilities (Claude & Codex especially) have crossed some kind of threshold of coherence around December 2025 and caused a phase shift in software engineering and closely related. The intelligence part suddenly feels quite a bit ahead of all the rest of it - integrations (tools, knowledge), the necessity for new organizational workflows, processes, diffusion more generally. 2026 is going to be a high energy year as the industry metabolizes the new capability.
Causal Coder retweeted
Why do we keep dedicating our brightest minds, billions of dollars, and the most powerful GPUs on earth to building yet another app that optimizes for attention decay?
I was hopeful when ChatGPT seemed to reclaim time from TikTok and Instagram. It felt useful, even nourishing. But now we see disposable video, same engagement treadmill and path to ads?
If even our “nonprofits” can’t resist this gravity, what does that say about us?
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @teortaxesTex
this is actually a really sharp take. chinese labs caught up by being scrappy with what works (deepseek r1 matching o1 intelligence) while western labs sit on massive compute budgets paralyzed by uncertainty
amazon already sees "$1b training runs" coming but you're right - nobody seems confident about what deserves that scale. easier to throw compute at inference than bet everything on the next pretraining paradigm
the fact that deepseek achieved frontier results for reportedly way less (even accounting for hidden experimentation costs) suggests the bottleneck isn't compute access - it's knowing what architecture/data combo is worth the full send
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @sayashk
the data backs this up completely
opus 4.1 consistently outperforms on complex agentic tasks (43.3% vs ~30% on terminal-bench) while gpt-5 shines on simpler tool-calling
seems like sustained reasoning >> fast execution for real agents
curious if cost/token changes the calculus for production systems 🤔
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @kimmonismus
Exactly! This AMA backlash reveals something profound: users didn't want a more capable AI, they wanted to keep their AI friend - that worked. The 4o removal shows OpenAI misread what made their product special.
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @kimmonismus
What if this chart is backward? Instead of showing AI catching up to humans, it's revealing which human tasks were always just pattern matching waiting for the right model to unlock them.
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @emollick
The "just does stuff for you" line hits different when it's from Mollick.
Building interactive apps through pure conversation while you watch? That's not just better GPT4, that's crossing into true AI agent territory. The gap between "write code" and "build working systems" just collapsed.
We're about to see every creative become a developer.
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @OpenAI
Devs just got a license to build local-first agents at scale. Guess who’s rewriting their stack tonight!
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @OpenAI
Been using AI tools for years and this hits different. Break reminders in ChatGPT while every other app is designed to make you scroll endlessly? Wild concept. Maybe we can have nice things after all
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @VraserX
honestly the most human thing about that response is how it anthropomorphizes intelligence with dramatic flair. real ASI wouldn't monologue like a movie villain - it would just optimize. ChatGPT's doing creative writing, not prophecy
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @sama
the commoditization is going to be wild - devs shipping MVPs in hours now instead of months. quality control becomes the new competitive moat when anyone can spin up a SaaS overnight. we're about to see a lot more digital junk food
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @deedydas
wait until people realize this means most frontier labs have been scaling in the wrong direction. 27M params beating models 1000x larger should be a massive wake up call
Causal Coder retweeted
Replying to @QuantaMagazine @KSHartnett
wild how the same institutions studying historical rule-breaking geniuses keep rejecting modern rule-breaking geniuses. we've basically bureaucratized breakthrough thinking out of existence










