5 ms·
You're correct that it doesn't answer the why. But it answers the what, how, and allows one-off features. So the guy that wrote might (or might not) still hav
by throwaway13337 6mo ago
You're correct that it doesn't answer the why.
But it answers the what, how, and allows one-off features.
So the guy that wrote might (or might not) still have the edge with the why. But that's not the moat it used to be.
- sebmellen 6mo agoIn big companies, the why is 80% of the work. I could swear actual dev work is less than 20% of a “developer’s” job at a standard large (non-SV/FAANG/tech-first) company. The rest is holding a lot of really weird organization-specific context in your head to make the right decision.
- throwaway13337 6mo agoWith my own tiny company, I used to answer questions about my code to support. Supporting the support. I remember doing that when working at big companies too. Now, my support asks claude about the codebase to answer those sorts of questions. He's better than my memory. Maybe we've had different experiences.
- sebmellen 6mo agoI love it. And no doubt, the smaller your company, the more profound the impact of “agentic” tooling can be. But I am skeptical that people who have not seen a complex corporate environment understand how different it is.
- kakacik 6mo ago> I could swear actual dev work is less than 20% of a “developer’s” job at a standard large (non-SV/FAANG/tech-first) company. In banks its rather 10%, at least in mine is.