> We also don't have continuous deployment (CD) set up. That's a weird thing for me to say as a positive, because for a very long time that was a hallmark of good software engineering practices... but with me shipping 108 PRs in a week, I actually have been thinking differently.

It’s still a hallmark of good software engineering.

It's the context around review, safety, etc that might make your headline interesting, but unfortunately i have no way of seeing that because the website times out.

There’s an enormous spectrum between nuclear safety code, and free consumer-facing software like Bluesky that can be down in some feature at any given point in time and not matter too much.

We have signed contracts with many large enterprise clients, which include assurances about security, data residency, data retention, and SLAs. Having even a part of the system go down or violate the contract is a big deal for us.

The way I would phrase it is “unless you’re working on systems that matter”. It’s not only nuclear safety code that matters.

Power to you friend!

Just make sure to do some phases of slowing down, reviewing and refactoring. The agents code so defensively and add a lot of unnecessary code that we will all have to trawl through when the bubble bursts and codex/cc subs are $2000 a month.

I mean, sure, LLMs add a new textual dimension to hyperparameter search. You used to write a program to write a program from some parameters (how many layers, hidden dimension, which inputs, how often to drop, what momentum, ... note: in practice limit the choices), and now you just tell an LLM to try them. Then run and collect results. People did this in 1990.

Hell, I've done "compile options search" with this principle. Just a big python array with options, run through them, benchmark. Then decide it's taking to long and find some way to "intelligently" run through them.

Boom, "loop engineering". I hate that everything keeps getting renamed. Give me back my HAAR cascades!