Video wird geladen...

Video konnte nicht geladen werden

Beim Laden dieses Videos ist ein Problem aufgetreten. Dies könnte an einem vorübergehenden Netzwerkproblem liegen oder das Video ist möglicherweise nicht verfügbar.

A DEVELOPER PROVED YOU CAN FIND THE EXACT COMMIT THAT BROKE YOUR CODE IN A HISTORY OF 10,000 -- IN ABOUT 13 STEPS, AUTOMATICALLY.. 33 minutes from a Google engineer on git bisect: the built-in command that binary-searches your entire history to hunt down the one commit that introduced... a bug. -> The moment it lands, "When did this break?" stops being an afternoon of guessing. You hand git a good commit, a bad one, and a test and it finds the culprit while you watch. Most people debug a regression by reading diffs by hand, blaming the obvious file, and hoping. Bisect doesn't hope. It cuts the search in half, then in half again, until only the guilty commit is left standing. Reading history by hand was never the skill -> letting git do the binary search for you is. And when an AI agent dumps hundreds of commits into your repo and one quietly breaks production, bisect is what finds the needle without you reading a single line. The bug isn't hiding. It's sitting in one exact commit. Most people just never learned to make git point at it. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓show more

slash1s

11,862 subscribers

37,857 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten •via X (Twitter)

Comedy Bildung Wissenschaft & Technologie

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Kommentare

Keine Kommentare verfügbar

Kommentare vom Original-Post werden hier angezeigt

Ähnliche Videos

A DEVELOPER MADE A REAL COMMIT WITHOUT EVER TYPING GIT ADD OR GIT COMMIT -- JUST TO PROVE THE COMMANDS YOU LIVE BY ARE A THIN SHELL OVER A DATABASE YOU'VE NEVER ONCE OPENED 55 minutes from Tim Berglund, a longtime Git teacher and GitHub evangelist, taking the tool apart down to the raw objects almost nobody who uses it every day has ever touched. -> The moment it clicks, Git stops being a pile of memorized commands and becomes what it actually is underneath: a tiny content-addressed database of blobs, trees and commits. git add and git commit are just polite wrappers around writing objects into it by hand. Every commit you've ever made was Git hashing a snapshot and filing it by fingerprint. Branches are just labels pointing at one of those objects. The work you thought you destroyed with a bad reset is still sitting in the reflog. Once you can see that graph, the commands that used to terrify you stop being scary at all. Memorizing commands was never the skill -> reading the object graph in your head is. And with an AI agent now committing and rebasing on your machine faster than you can follow, the one person who can untangle the mess it leaves is the one who knows what's really stored down there. There's a person on every team everyone runs to when Git breaks. This is the talk that quietly turns you into them. You'll reach for it the next time a rebase goes sideways. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

A DEVELOPER MADE A REAL COMMIT WITHOUT EVER TYPING GIT ADD OR GIT COMMIT -- JUST TO PROVE THE COMMANDS YOU LIVE BY ARE A THIN SHELL OVER A DATABASE YOU'VE NEVER ONCE OPENED 55 minutes from Tim Berglund, a longtime Git teacher and GitHub evangelist, taking the tool apart down to the raw objects almost nobody who uses it every day has ever touched. -> The moment it clicks, Git stops being a pile of memorized commands and becomes what it actually is underneath: a tiny content-addressed database of blobs, trees and commits. git add and git commit are just polite wrappers around writing objects into it by hand. Every commit you've ever made was Git hashing a snapshot and filing it by fingerprint. Branches are just labels pointing at one of those objects. The work you thought you destroyed with a bad reset is still sitting in the reflog. Once you can see that graph, the commands that used to terrify you stop being scary at all. Memorizing commands was never the skill -> reading the object graph in your head is. And with an AI agent now committing and rebasing on your machine faster than you can follow, the one person who can untangle the mess it leaves is the one who knows what's really stored down there. There's a person on every team everyone runs to when Git breaks. This is the talk that quietly turns you into them. You'll reach for it the next time a rebase goes sideways. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

239,290 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Try this Git developer challenge: a bug appeared somewhere in the last 500 commits, and you have a test that detects it. What’s the shortest path to find the exact commit where it was introduced? Share your answer in the comments.

Try this Git developer challenge: a bug appeared somewhere in the last 500 commits, and you have a test that detects it. What’s the shortest path to find the exact commit where it was introduced? Share your answer in the comments.

Google for Developers

16,480 Aufrufe • vor 4 Monaten

A DEVELOPER WHO HELPS MAINTAIN GIT ITSELF PROVED THAT USING GIT AND CONTRIBUTING WITH GIT ARE TWO DIFFERENT SKILLS AND ALMOST NO ONE LEARNS THE SECOND 55 minutes from Johannes Schindelin, one of git's most prolific contributors, on the workflow that gets your code accepted into a project you don't own. -> The moment it lands, committing to your own repo turns out to be the easy 10%. Landing a change in someone else's codebase is the part nobody taught you. Most people can save their own work. Far fewer can revise a patch five times, keep the history clean, and merge it into a project moving under them. Saving your code was never the skill -> getting it merged into someone else's is. And when an AI agent fires off a pull request nobody asked for, the person who knows how to really contribute is the one who gets it accepted instead of closed. Anyone can commit to their own repo. The person who can land a change in a project they don't own is the one who actually ships. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

A DEVELOPER WHO HELPS MAINTAIN GIT ITSELF PROVED THAT USING GIT AND CONTRIBUTING WITH GIT ARE TWO DIFFERENT SKILLS AND ALMOST NO ONE LEARNS THE SECOND 55 minutes from Johannes Schindelin, one of git's most prolific contributors, on the workflow that gets your code accepted into a project you don't own. -> The moment it lands, committing to your own repo turns out to be the easy 10%. Landing a change in someone else's codebase is the part nobody taught you. Most people can save their own work. Far fewer can revise a patch five times, keep the history clean, and merge it into a project moving under them. Saving your code was never the skill -> getting it merged into someone else's is. And when an AI agent fires off a pull request nobody asked for, the person who knows how to really contribute is the one who gets it accepted instead of closed. Anyone can commit to their own repo. The person who can land a change in a project they don't own is the one who actually ships. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

12,797 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

MICROSOFT PUT THE ENTIRE SOURCE CODE OF WINDOWS INTO A SINGLE GIT REPO -- 300 GIGABYTES, 3.5 MILLION FILES AND MADE IT CLONE IN SECONDS 31 minutes from the Microsoft engineer who actually did it, bending the tool you use for a 50-file side project to hold the biggest codebase on the planet. -> The moment it lands, every excuse dies. You've heard "Git doesn't scale, use something else" your whole career. They ran git status on the largest repo alive and it came back instantly. The secret wasn't a different tool. It was understanding what git actually stores and realizing you never need the whole thing on disk. Pull only the files you touch. Ignore the 3.4 million you never will. Knowing the commands was never the ceiling -> understanding how git stores and moves things is what lets you do what everyone swears is impossible. And as AI agents spin up repos that balloon overnight, knowing how git scales is what keeps you from drowning in your own history. Everyone treats git like it maxes out at a hobby project. One team quietly proved it can hold an operating system. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

MICROSOFT PUT THE ENTIRE SOURCE CODE OF WINDOWS INTO A SINGLE GIT REPO -- 300 GIGABYTES, 3.5 MILLION FILES AND MADE IT CLONE IN SECONDS 31 minutes from the Microsoft engineer who actually did it, bending the tool you use for a 50-file side project to hold the biggest codebase on the planet. -> The moment it lands, every excuse dies. You've heard "Git doesn't scale, use something else" your whole career. They ran git status on the largest repo alive and it came back instantly. The secret wasn't a different tool. It was understanding what git actually stores and realizing you never need the whole thing on disk. Pull only the files you touch. Ignore the 3.4 million you never will. Knowing the commands was never the ceiling -> understanding how git stores and moves things is what lets you do what everyone swears is impossible. And as AI agents spin up repos that balloon overnight, knowing how git scales is what keeps you from drowning in your own history. Everyone treats git like it maxes out at a hobby project. One team quietly proved it can hold an operating system. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

255,565 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

TWO ENGINEERS SHOWED THE GIT TRICKS THAT MAKE PEOPLE THINK YOU'RE A WIZARD -- THE ONES 95% OF DEVELOPERS HAVE NEVER ONCE TOUCHED 42 minutes from Johan Abildskov and Jan Krag, bending git with custom configs, attributes and hooks most people don't even know exist. -> The moment it lands, git stops being four commands you repeat in fear. The same tool you've used for years turns out to have a whole layer built to bend to you. Hooks that run your checks before a bad commit ever lands. Attributes that end the "it works on my machine" merge wars. Config that makes the painful parts just stop happening. Memorizing commands was never the ceiling -> shaping git to do the work for you is. And while everyone else fights the tool by hand, the person who set it up right is shipping clean three times faster. Most people use 5% of git and call it a day. This is the other 95% nobody showed you. Bookmark it and Watch today ↓

TWO ENGINEERS SHOWED THE GIT TRICKS THAT MAKE PEOPLE THINK YOU'RE A WIZARD -- THE ONES 95% OF DEVELOPERS HAVE NEVER ONCE TOUCHED 42 minutes from Johan Abildskov and Jan Krag, bending git with custom configs, attributes and hooks most people don't even know exist. -> The moment it lands, git stops being four commands you repeat in fear. The same tool you've used for years turns out to have a whole layer built to bend to you. Hooks that run your checks before a bad commit ever lands. Attributes that end the "it works on my machine" merge wars. Config that makes the painful parts just stop happening. Memorizing commands was never the ceiling -> shaping git to do the work for you is. And while everyone else fights the tool by hand, the person who set it up right is shipping clean three times faster. Most people use 5% of git and call it a day. This is the other 95% nobody showed you. Bookmark it and Watch today ↓

slash1s

105,656 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

MIT DEDICATED A FULL LECTURE TO GIT'S INTERNALS -- BECAUSE THEY FOUND MOST DEVS MEMORIZE THE COMMANDS AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE TOOL ACTUALLY DOES A whole 85 minutes MIT session that refuses to teach git as a list of commands to copy, and instead shows you the data model underneath -- the thing that makes every command finally make sense. -> The moment it clicks, git stops being scary magic. You stop memorizing "The incantation that fixed it last time" and start actually knowing what's happening. Most people learn just enough git to not get fired. Four commands, blind faith, and a prayer before every merge. In 2026 that's not enough anymore -> git is the literacy test for being in the room, and "I'll just reclone it" is the fastest way to look junior. An AI agent will branch, commit and rebase faster than you can read. When it tangles the history, untangling it runs on understanding the model MIT teaches in this one hour. Anyone can run git push. The person who understands the graph underneath is the one who saves the repo when it breaks. Bookmark & Watch it ↓

MIT DEDICATED A FULL LECTURE TO GIT'S INTERNALS -- BECAUSE THEY FOUND MOST DEVS MEMORIZE THE COMMANDS AND HAVE NO IDEA WHAT THE TOOL ACTUALLY DOES A whole 85 minutes MIT session that refuses to teach git as a list of commands to copy, and instead shows you the data model underneath -- the thing that makes every command finally make sense. -> The moment it clicks, git stops being scary magic. You stop memorizing "The incantation that fixed it last time" and start actually knowing what's happening. Most people learn just enough git to not get fired. Four commands, blind faith, and a prayer before every merge. In 2026 that's not enough anymore -> git is the literacy test for being in the room, and "I'll just reclone it" is the fastest way to look junior. An AI agent will branch, commit and rebase faster than you can read. When it tangles the history, untangling it runs on understanding the model MIT teaches in this one hour. Anyone can run git push. The person who understands the graph underneath is the one who saves the repo when it breaks. Bookmark & Watch it ↓

slash1s

459,754 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

MIT GAVE DEBUGGING ITS OWN FULL LECTURE -- BECAUSE MOST DEVS STILL HUNT BUGS WITH PRINT STATEMENTS LIKE IT'S 1995 54 minutes that take the thing you do every single day, badly, and show you the tools schools never bothered to teach. -> The moment it lands, you realize "add a print, run it, add another print" was never debugging. It was guessing with extra steps. Most people never learned the real toolkit. A proper debugger, breakpoints, tracing what the program actually does instead of what you assume it does. In 2026 guessing isn't good enough -> the bug is buried in code you didn't even write, and printf won't find it for you. An AI agent will generate hundreds of lines in seconds. When one of them quietly breaks, finding it runs on exactly the skills in this lecture. Anyone can add a print statement. The person who can actually trace a bug to its source is the one who ships while everyone else guesses. Bookmark & Watch it ↓

MIT GAVE DEBUGGING ITS OWN FULL LECTURE -- BECAUSE MOST DEVS STILL HUNT BUGS WITH PRINT STATEMENTS LIKE IT'S 1995 54 minutes that take the thing you do every single day, badly, and show you the tools schools never bothered to teach. -> The moment it lands, you realize "add a print, run it, add another print" was never debugging. It was guessing with extra steps. Most people never learned the real toolkit. A proper debugger, breakpoints, tracing what the program actually does instead of what you assume it does. In 2026 guessing isn't good enough -> the bug is buried in code you didn't even write, and printf won't find it for you. An AI agent will generate hundreds of lines in seconds. When one of them quietly breaks, finding it runs on exactly the skills in this lecture. Anyone can add a print statement. The person who can actually trace a bug to its source is the one who ships while everyone else guesses. Bookmark & Watch it ↓

slash1s

10,864 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

THE CO-FOUNDER OF GITHUB GAVE A 46-MINUTE TALK ON GIT BECAUSE ENGINEERS WITH 10 YEARS IN HAVE NEVER SEEN HALF OF WHAT IT DOES This is Scott Chacon. He wrote Pro Git -- the book most devs secretly learned Git from and he co-founded GitHub. So when he says you're missing things, you're missing things. About ten minutes in it clicks: half the "git disasters" you've ever fixed by deleting the folder and re-cloning had a one-line solution sitting in the tool the whole time. Git ships new code almost every day -> roughly nine commits a day for over a decade. Most of us stopped learning it the second we memorized add, commit, push. Knowing Git isn't a senior-dev flex anymore -> it's the floor. The agent writes the code now. Your real job is reading, branching, and untangling the history it leaves behind. The day an AI agent force-pushes over your main branch, these 46 minutes are the difference between a quiet fix and a very loud apology. Save it now. You'll reach for it sooner than you'd like ↓

THE CO-FOUNDER OF GITHUB GAVE A 46-MINUTE TALK ON GIT BECAUSE ENGINEERS WITH 10 YEARS IN HAVE NEVER SEEN HALF OF WHAT IT DOES This is Scott Chacon. He wrote Pro Git -- the book most devs secretly learned Git from and he co-founded GitHub. So when he says you're missing things, you're missing things. About ten minutes in it clicks: half the "git disasters" you've ever fixed by deleting the folder and re-cloning had a one-line solution sitting in the tool the whole time. Git ships new code almost every day -> roughly nine commits a day for over a decade. Most of us stopped learning it the second we memorized add, commit, push. Knowing Git isn't a senior-dev flex anymore -> it's the floor. The agent writes the code now. Your real job is reading, branching, and untangling the history it leaves behind. The day an AI agent force-pushes over your main branch, these 46 minutes are the difference between a quiet fix and a very loud apology. Save it now. You'll reach for it sooner than you'd like ↓

slash1s

28,052 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

HARVARD HAS A FULL 53-MIN GIT LECTURE FROM DAVID MALAN BECAUSE 90% OF NEW DEVELOPERS STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT A COMMIT ACTUALLY IS 53 minutes of no-nonsense version control from the instructor whose course became the largest class in Harvard history. -> The moment you watch it, you realize why "I'll just push to main" is the fastest way to get fired in your first month. Every junior engineer in 2026 is expected to handle Git on day one - no excuses, no Stack Overflow, no AI hand-holding. Git isn't a "senior dev thing" anymore -> it's the literacy test for being in the room. The agent can ship the feature in 5 minutes. Recovering the repo it broke takes 5 hours - and only if you actually understand what happened. Don't forget to bookmark it.

HARVARD HAS A FULL 53-MIN GIT LECTURE FROM DAVID MALAN BECAUSE 90% OF NEW DEVELOPERS STILL DON'T KNOW WHAT A COMMIT ACTUALLY IS 53 minutes of no-nonsense version control from the instructor whose course became the largest class in Harvard history. -> The moment you watch it, you realize why "I'll just push to main" is the fastest way to get fired in your first month. Every junior engineer in 2026 is expected to handle Git on day one - no excuses, no Stack Overflow, no AI hand-holding. Git isn't a "senior dev thing" anymore -> it's the literacy test for being in the room. The agent can ship the feature in 5 minutes. Recovering the repo it broke takes 5 hours - and only if you actually understand what happened. Don't forget to bookmark it.

slash1s

253,313 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

AN MIT RESEARCHER PROVED GIT ISN'T HARD BECAUSE YOU'RE BAD AT IT -- IT'S HARD BECAUSE IT WAS DESIGNED THAT WAY 27 minutes from a PhD researcher in MIT's Software Design Group, using actual design theory to show why the tool that confuses everyone confuses everyone for a reason. -> The moment it lands, years of feeling stupid evaporate. The gap between what git's commands say and what they actually do was never in your head. It's baked into the tool. He maps the difference between what you think a command does and what git really does underneath. Once you see that gap, the confusion finally has a name and it stops being yours to carry. Struggling with git was never a skills issue -> it's a design issue, and knowing where the model lies to you is what turns panic into control. And as AI agents fire off commits and rebases you didn't write, the person who understands where git misleads is the one who untangles the mess. You were never bad at git. You were just never shown where it was built to trip you. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

AN MIT RESEARCHER PROVED GIT ISN'T HARD BECAUSE YOU'RE BAD AT IT -- IT'S HARD BECAUSE IT WAS DESIGNED THAT WAY 27 minutes from a PhD researcher in MIT's Software Design Group, using actual design theory to show why the tool that confuses everyone confuses everyone for a reason. -> The moment it lands, years of feeling stupid evaporate. The gap between what git's commands say and what they actually do was never in your head. It's baked into the tool. He maps the difference between what you think a command does and what git really does underneath. Once you see that gap, the confusion finally has a name and it stops being yours to carry. Struggling with git was never a skills issue -> it's a design issue, and knowing where the model lies to you is what turns panic into control. And as AI agents fire off commits and rebases you didn't write, the person who understands where git misleads is the one who untangles the mess. You were never bad at git. You were just never shown where it was built to trip you. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

138,043 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

Git Merge vs. Rebase vs. Squash Commit What are the differences and when should you use each? As I explain in more detail in the video, there are some key distinctions. Git Merge This creates a new commit in the target branch. The new commit ties the histories of both main and feature branches together. Git merge is non-destructive - it introduces a new commit without altering existing ones. Git Rebase Rebase transplants commits to the tip of another branch. It creates new commits for each one moved over. The benefit is linear history. But be cautious with shared branches to avoid confusing collaborators. Squash Commit Squashing condenses multiple commits into one, streamlining the commit history. Watch the video to see when to use merge vs rebase vs squash when incorporating changes between main and feature branches. – Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to get a Free System Design PDF (158 pages):

Git Merge vs. Rebase vs. Squash Commit What are the differences and when should you use each? As I explain in more detail in the video, there are some key distinctions. Git Merge This creates a new commit in the target branch. The new commit ties the histories of both main and feature branches together. Git merge is non-destructive - it introduces a new commit without altering existing ones. Git Rebase Rebase transplants commits to the tip of another branch. It creates new commits for each one moved over. The benefit is linear history. But be cautious with shared branches to avoid confusing collaborators. Squash Commit Squashing condenses multiple commits into one, streamlining the commit history. Watch the video to see when to use merge vs rebase vs squash when incorporating changes between main and feature branches. – Subscribe to our weekly newsletter to get a Free System Design PDF (158 pages):

Sahn Lam

65,209 Aufrufe • vor 2 Jahren

A DEVELOPER TAUGHT GIT WITH A BOX OF CHILDREN'S TOYS AND ENGINEERS WITH TEN YEARS IN SAY IT'S THE FIRST TIME THE THING EVER ACTUALLY MADE SENSE 90 minutes, one table, a pile of Tinkertoys. No wall of jargon -- he builds a real Git repo out of plastic rods right in front of you. -> The moment he snaps the first pieces together, Git stops being scary command-line magic and becomes what it really is: a chain of tiny objects pointing at each other. Branches, merges, rebase, the staging area -- every concept that's ever burned you at 2am -- he rebuilds with toys until a four year old could follow. He calls Git a two-trick pony. After this you'll see exactly why. Memorizing commands was never the skill -> holding the graph in your head is. And with an AI agent now committing and rebasing on your machine all day, that mental model is the only thing between you and a history you can't read. Scroll the comments and you'll see the same thing over and over: this is the talk that finally made Git click and made people the one their whole team comes to when it breaks. Bookmark & watch it today. It's the 1.5 hours that pays you back for the rest of your career ↓

A DEVELOPER TAUGHT GIT WITH A BOX OF CHILDREN'S TOYS AND ENGINEERS WITH TEN YEARS IN SAY IT'S THE FIRST TIME THE THING EVER ACTUALLY MADE SENSE 90 minutes, one table, a pile of Tinkertoys. No wall of jargon -- he builds a real Git repo out of plastic rods right in front of you. -> The moment he snaps the first pieces together, Git stops being scary command-line magic and becomes what it really is: a chain of tiny objects pointing at each other. Branches, merges, rebase, the staging area -- every concept that's ever burned you at 2am -- he rebuilds with toys until a four year old could follow. He calls Git a two-trick pony. After this you'll see exactly why. Memorizing commands was never the skill -> holding the graph in your head is. And with an AI agent now committing and rebasing on your machine all day, that mental model is the only thing between you and a history you can't read. Scroll the comments and you'll see the same thing over and over: this is the talk that finally made Git click and made people the one their whole team comes to when it breaks. Bookmark & watch it today. It's the 1.5 hours that pays you back for the rest of your career ↓

slash1s

228,519 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

A LINUX KERNEL DEVELOPER PROVED THE THING YOU PUSH CODE TO IS SECRETLY A DATABASE THAT CAN VERSION ALMOST ANYTHING AND THAT MOST DEVS HAVE ONLY EVER TOUCHED A TENTH OF IT 42 minutes from Josh Triplett -- a longtime Linux kernel and Debian developer -- showing that Git is a general-purpose, tamper-evident versioning engine that just happens to be famous for code. -> The moment it clicks, Git stops being "Where my code lives" and becomes what it really is underneath: a content-addressable store that can version almost anything -- your configs, your notes, your servers' state, entire datasets. People run whole wikis on it. They version their entire machine's configuration with it. They ship websites by pushing to it. They track data too big to email. None of it is a hack -- it's the same handful of objects you already use for code, pointed somewhere new. Treating Git as a code-only tool was never the ceiling -> it's a versioning engine for anything, and the people who see that automate what the rest of the team still does by hand. And as AI agents start spitting out not just code but configs, docs and data, the one system that can version and audit all of it at once is already sitting on your machine. You learned five commands to survive. This is the talk that shows you were standing on top of a database the whole time. It changes what you think the tool is even for. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

A LINUX KERNEL DEVELOPER PROVED THE THING YOU PUSH CODE TO IS SECRETLY A DATABASE THAT CAN VERSION ALMOST ANYTHING AND THAT MOST DEVS HAVE ONLY EVER TOUCHED A TENTH OF IT 42 minutes from Josh Triplett -- a longtime Linux kernel and Debian developer -- showing that Git is a general-purpose, tamper-evident versioning engine that just happens to be famous for code. -> The moment it clicks, Git stops being "Where my code lives" and becomes what it really is underneath: a content-addressable store that can version almost anything -- your configs, your notes, your servers' state, entire datasets. People run whole wikis on it. They version their entire machine's configuration with it. They ship websites by pushing to it. They track data too big to email. None of it is a hack -- it's the same handful of objects you already use for code, pointed somewhere new. Treating Git as a code-only tool was never the ceiling -> it's a versioning engine for anything, and the people who see that automate what the rest of the team still does by hand. And as AI agents start spitting out not just code but configs, docs and data, the one system that can version and audit all of it at once is already sitting on your machine. You learned five commands to survive. This is the talk that shows you were standing on top of a database the whole time. It changes what you think the tool is even for. Bookmark & Watch it today ↓

slash1s

385,976 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE LANGUAGE RUNNING EVERY WEBSITE YOU USE IS A MINEFIELD AND THAT ALMOST NO ONE WAS EVER TAUGHT WHICH PARTS ARE SAFE An hour from Douglas Crockford, the man who invented JSON, on the good parts of JavaScript buried under a pile of blunders nobody warned you about. -> The moment it lands, every weird bug makes sense. The language never had time to be polished. It went global in months, bad parts and all, and you inherited every one of them. Global variables. Silent semicolon insertion. eval. Coercion that turns a simple comparison into a coin flip. Most people never learned to avoid them -- they just lose hours and blame themselves. Writing JavaScript that runs was never the skill -> knowing which half of it to never touch is. And when an AI agent happily generates the bad parts at scale, the person who knows the safe subset is the one who catches it before it ships. Everyone writes JavaScript. Almost no one was shown the line between the parts that save you and the parts that quietly burn you. Bookmark and Watch it ↓

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE LANGUAGE RUNNING EVERY WEBSITE YOU USE IS A MINEFIELD AND THAT ALMOST NO ONE WAS EVER TAUGHT WHICH PARTS ARE SAFE An hour from Douglas Crockford, the man who invented JSON, on the good parts of JavaScript buried under a pile of blunders nobody warned you about. -> The moment it lands, every weird bug makes sense. The language never had time to be polished. It went global in months, bad parts and all, and you inherited every one of them. Global variables. Silent semicolon insertion. eval. Coercion that turns a simple comparison into a coin flip. Most people never learned to avoid them -- they just lose hours and blame themselves. Writing JavaScript that runs was never the skill -> knowing which half of it to never touch is. And when an AI agent happily generates the bad parts at scale, the person who knows the safe subset is the one who catches it before it ships. Everyone writes JavaScript. Almost no one was shown the line between the parts that save you and the parts that quietly burn you. Bookmark and Watch it ↓

slash1s

13,073 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

A screen recording is the best context you can give an AI agent. It's also the worst. A few seconds of video is thousands of images. Feed that to an agent and you instantly blow up its memory. So I built a tool that fixes it. How it works: Hit record and just do your thing. Click around, type, and talk out loud about what you're doing. While you record, it quietly captures the stuff that actually matters: your voice transcription, every click and the exact thing you clicked, what you typed, and the shortcuts you press. When you stop, it doesn't hand the agent the whole video. It writes a short, readable summary: a timeline of what you said and did. The agent reads that tiny summary first. Then, only when it needs to actually see a moment, it pulls that one exact frame from the video, like flipping to a single page instead of reading the whole book. The result: the agent understands everything you did! Full context. Less tokens.

A screen recording is the best context you can give an AI agent. It's also the worst. A few seconds of video is thousands of images. Feed that to an agent and you instantly blow up its memory. So I built a tool that fixes it. How it works: Hit record and just do your thing. Click around, type, and talk out loud about what you're doing. While you record, it quietly captures the stuff that actually matters: your voice transcription, every click and the exact thing you clicked, what you typed, and the shortcuts you press. When you stop, it doesn't hand the agent the whole video. It writes a short, readable summary: a timeline of what you said and did. The agent reads that tiny summary first. Then, only when it needs to actually see a moment, it pulls that one exact frame from the video, like flipping to a single page instead of reading the whole book. The result: the agent understands everything you did! Full context. Less tokens.

Milind S

12,409 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

IN 1986 MIT FILMED THE LECTURE WHERE CODE STOPPED BEING CODE AND BECAME DATA 43 minutes from Gerald Sussman, in the most legendary intro programming course ever recorded. -> The idea that lands: to a program, your code is just data it can read and rewrite. He builds a program that does real calculus -- not by crunching numbers, but by reading the math as a list and transforming it piece by piece. Then he shows the trick hiding under all of it: in this language, code and data are the same material. Forty years later that is exactly what an AI coding agent is -- a program that reads your code as data, rewrites it, and hands it back. Sussman drew the whole idea on a blackboard in 1986. Writing code was never the deepest skill -- understanding that code itself is data a program can manipulate is. This is where you learn it. Most people think AI writing code is brand new. The ones who watch this saw the blueprint 40 years ago. Bookmark & Watch it. This one's a legend ↓

slash1s

22,107 Aufrufe • vor 2 Monaten

Can your agent finally edit your videos? Yup, it's a repo called video use, by Browser Use. You put the raw footage in a folder. Then Claude Code or Codex edits it. It removes the filler words, cuts the dead space, adds the subtitles, and renders the file. Then it checks its own cut points. Most creators use the same small set of edits in every video. That style stays in your head and in your hands. This repo puts it in a file that an agent can read. People ask for a full YouTube channel on day one. They see bad results, and they stop. Start with one format instead. - One founder loom into a 60 second launch video - 3 clips out of one podcast recording Then make the format a system. Then you operate the system, or you sell it. - Real estate agents need listing videos - Coaches need clips - Agencies need ad variations Manual installation with git clone is possible. For 95% of people, the agent is faster. Here's how i intalled it: - Gave the setup prompt to Claude Code with shell access - Let it read install.md - Installed the repo - Connected FFmpeg - Registered the skill

Can your agent finally edit your videos? Yup, it's a repo called video use, by Browser Use. You put the raw footage in a folder. Then Claude Code or Codex edits it. It removes the filler words, cuts the dead space, adds the subtitles, and renders the file. Then it checks its own cut points. Most creators use the same small set of edits in every video. That style stays in your head and in your hands. This repo puts it in a file that an agent can read. People ask for a full YouTube channel on day one. They see bad results, and they stop. Start with one format instead. - One founder loom into a 60 second launch video - 3 clips out of one podcast recording Then make the format a system. Then you operate the system, or you sell it. - Real estate agents need listing videos - Coaches need clips - Agencies need ad variations Manual installation with git clone is possible. For 95% of people, the agent is faster. Here's how i intalled it: - Gave the setup prompt to Claude Code with shell access - Let it read install.md - Installed the repo - Connected FFmpeg - Registered the skill

The Startup Ideas Podcast (SIP) 🧃

15,605 Aufrufe • vor 15 Tagen

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE CLASSES YOU WRITE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CLASSES AT ALL 27 minutes from Jack Diederich, a Python core developer, on how much of your code is just a function wearing a costume. -> The moment it lands, the rule is brutal: if a class has two methods and one is __init__, you meant to write a function. Most people add structure to feel like real engineers. It just adds weight no one ever needed. Writing more code was never the skill -> writing less of it is. And when an AI agent happily generates ten classes for a job that needed three lines, the person who knows what to delete is the one who ships something clean. Anyone can add abstraction. Knowing when not to is the whole job. Bookmark it and Watch ↓

A DEVELOPER PROVED THAT MOST OF THE CLASSES YOU WRITE SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN CLASSES AT ALL 27 minutes from Jack Diederich, a Python core developer, on how much of your code is just a function wearing a costume. -> The moment it lands, the rule is brutal: if a class has two methods and one is init, you meant to write a function. Most people add structure to feel like real engineers. It just adds weight no one ever needed. Writing more code was never the skill -> writing less of it is. And when an AI agent happily generates ten classes for a job that needed three lines, the person who knows what to delete is the one who ships something clean. Anyone can add abstraction. Knowing when not to is the whole job. Bookmark it and Watch ↓

slash1s

269,515 Aufrufe • vor 3 Monaten

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 6 RULES THAT LET ONE FOLDER REPLACE A WHOLE AI ENGINEERING TEAM COSTING $3.2M A YEAR folder with 6 files replaced the AI engineers - and the team that spent 4 years writing them isn't needed anymore. file → commit → description matches → loads → runs → leaves a prompt has no history, a folder has a git log - one commit updates every session at once, and every edit shows up in the diff. two prompts fight over one window - two skills just both apply, and nobody merges anything by hand. 8 skills sit on disk, one enters the context - the other seven cost zero tokens until the description matches. a prompt can only ask - the folder carries build py and template.docx inside it, so the deterministic parts stay deterministic. the same skill works in Claude Code, in Cowork and through the API - a prompt lives only in the window you pasted it into. and the main one: a skill leaves the window when it's done - a prompt never leaves. save this - 6 rules, one folder, zero copy-paste ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED 6 RULES THAT LET ONE FOLDER REPLACE A WHOLE AI ENGINEERING TEAM COSTING $3.2M A YEAR folder with 6 files replaced the AI engineers - and the team that spent 4 years writing them isn't needed anymore. file → commit → description matches → loads → runs → leaves a prompt has no history, a folder has a git log - one commit updates every session at once, and every edit shows up in the diff. two prompts fight over one window - two skills just both apply, and nobody merges anything by hand. 8 skills sit on disk, one enters the context - the other seven cost zero tokens until the description matches. a prompt can only ask - the folder carries build py and template.docx inside it, so the deterministic parts stay deterministic. the same skill works in Claude Code, in Cowork and through the API - a prompt lives only in the window you pasted it into. and the main one: a skill leaves the window when it's done - a prompt never leaves. save this - 6 rules, one folder, zero copy-paste ↓

Sprytix

11,389 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE ONE FILE STARTS 7 LOOPS THAT TURN A PROMPT INTO A WORKING BUSINESS AI engineer drops in 1 file - the other 95% of the work closes automatically without them. spec → tasks → code → tests → docs → release → monitoring → back into the spec you don't write tickets anymore - you write the thing tickets get derived from, and Opus 5 cuts the spec into 6 tasks by itself. a task that fails its test comes back to itself, not to you - and runs a second lap without a single notification. 6 lanes of code run in parallel and none of them wait on you - the critic filters the diff before you ever open it. every new production bug becomes a permanent line in the eval set - the system never steps on it twice. monitoring isn't the end of the line, it's the start of the next spec - those back edges are what make it a graph instead of a conveyor. and one place is left where you say yes - release, 5 minutes instead of 5 hours. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 7 loops that run without you ↓

ANTHROPIC LEAKED A SETUP WHERE ONE FILE STARTS 7 LOOPS THAT TURN A PROMPT INTO A WORKING BUSINESS AI engineer drops in 1 file - the other 95% of the work closes automatically without them. spec → tasks → code → tests → docs → release → monitoring → back into the spec you don't write tickets anymore - you write the thing tickets get derived from, and Opus 5 cuts the spec into 6 tasks by itself. a task that fails its test comes back to itself, not to you - and runs a second lap without a single notification. 6 lanes of code run in parallel and none of them wait on you - the critic filters the diff before you ever open it. every new production bug becomes a permanent line in the eval set - the system never steps on it twice. monitoring isn't the end of the line, it's the start of the next spec - those back edges are what make it a graph instead of a conveyor. and one place is left where you say yes - release, 5 minutes instead of 5 hours. save this and paste it into Claude Code - and you get 7 loops that run without you ↓

Sprytix

66,333 Aufrufe • vor 1 Monat