Loading video...

Video Failed to Load

There was a problem loading this video. This could be due to a temporary network issue or the video might be unavailable.

AI is changing the software engineering craft. Anders Hejlsberg (Anders Hejlsberg) - creator of C#, TypeScript and industry legend - on why code review needs to get more enjoyable in response: #1 - AI is shifting the craft from writing code, to reviewing code: "In a sense, we're all... turning into project managers. We can have an army of junior programmers, called agents, that will just spit out reams of code but someone's got to have the big picture and review all of that. And so, increasingly, our craft is going from one of writing the code, to one of reviewing the code and building the architecture of the code and overseeing the work. It's a different kind of craft. It's a different kind of enjoyment. I've always liked writing the code. To me that was the fulfilling part, seeing it work. In a way, AI robs a little bit of that, because I am less interested in reviewing code." #2 - The code review experience should be improved: "I think we could also make the process of reviewing code much more interesting than it is today. I mean, today, you see a list of diffs in alphabetical order and now it's up to you to make heads or tails of it. There are more pedagogical ways of presenting that. And you could have commentary generated by the AI that tells you what the changes are and whatever, and then tries to guide you along. So that symbiotic relationship, I think we need to work on that more and to keep the enjoyment in there."show more

The Pragmatic Engineer

47,517 subscribers

38,988 views • 1 month ago •via X (Twitter)

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

0 Comments

No comments available

Comments from the original post will appear here

Related Videos

"The one thing that's going to be truly future proof is judgment. What is the biggest challenge when you have a thousand AI engineers writing code? AI slop. In an era when you can do everything, the question is which of these things matter. On the engineer side, it is evaluating the code. Which of this code is even valuable? You can have AI engineers writing beautiful code that could be wrong, that could have bugs in it, that could be vulnerable. Someone needs to review it. Make sure to have a human review at some point, especially critical code that is in the core of your system. On the product side is judgment around what needs to be built and evaluating. And similarly in design, you have to have judgment around, does it make sense in the broader design system. I think this judgment is the number one thing that humans are going to bring in an era of infinite productivity."

"The one thing that's going to be truly future proof is judgment. What is the biggest challenge when you have a thousand AI engineers writing code? AI slop. In an era when you can do everything, the question is which of these things matter. On the engineer side, it is evaluating the code. Which of this code is even valuable? You can have AI engineers writing beautiful code that could be wrong, that could have bugs in it, that could be vulnerable. Someone needs to review it. Make sure to have a human review at some point, especially critical code that is in the core of your system. On the product side is judgment around what needs to be built and evaluating. And similarly in design, you have to have judgment around, does it make sense in the broader design system. I think this judgment is the number one thing that humans are going to bring in an era of infinite productivity."

Patrick OShaughnessy

24,818 views • 5 months ago

We've built a massive verification bottleneck: • 72% of developers use AI to generate code every day • 96% of them don't fully trust it Writing code is now free. All the work now is verifying that the code does what it's supposed to. According to a new State of Code Survey, almost half of the respondents believe the number one skill that will matter most in the coming years is "reviewing and validating AI-generated code for quality and security". Not prompt engineering or vibe-coding, but checking AI's work.

We've built a massive verification bottleneck: • 72% of developers use AI to generate code every day • 96% of them don't fully trust it Writing code is now free. All the work now is verifying that the code does what it's supposed to. According to a new State of Code Survey, almost half of the respondents believe the number one skill that will matter most in the coming years is "reviewing and validating AI-generated code for quality and security". Not prompt engineering or vibe-coding, but checking AI's work.

Santiago

16,299 views • 5 months ago

Reviewing AI-generated code is the new bottleneck. Writing code was slow before. Now, in a few minutes, you can generate virtually unlimited lines of code using AI. But developers are now spending 70% of their time checking that code. That's the new bottleneck. I've been using Cline, and they have a feature that actually helps with this: You can click a button and have Cline generate an inline explanation for every single line of AI-generated code. Take a look at the attached video. What it does: 1. You can read the code and the explanation together 2. You don't lose context while reviewing code 3. You understand the "why" behind each change And here is the best part: It works on any git diff. You can use it to review PRs, understand commits from other people, or catch up on a codebase you haven't touched in a while.

Reviewing AI-generated code is the new bottleneck. Writing code was slow before. Now, in a few minutes, you can generate virtually unlimited lines of code using AI. But developers are now spending 70% of their time checking that code. That's the new bottleneck. I've been using Cline, and they have a feature that actually helps with this: You can click a button and have Cline generate an inline explanation for every single line of AI-generated code. Take a look at the attached video. What it does: 1. You can read the code and the explanation together 2. You don't lose context while reviewing code 3. You understand the "why" behind each change And here is the best part: It works on any git diff. You can use it to review PRs, understand commits from other people, or catch up on a codebase you haven't touched in a while.

Santiago

64,399 views • 7 months ago

Insane: 90-95% of Claude Code is now written by Claude Code. I asked Mike Krieger (Anthropic's CPO) what changes when so much of your code is written by AI? His answer: The bottleneck moves from coding/design to: 1. Upstream: aligning the team around what to build. 2. Downstream: the PR merge queue, reviewing and merging all of the new code into production. Anthropic is where other product teams will be in a year or two, so it's important we pay attention. "I would expect that a year from now, the way that we are conceiving of building and shipping software changes a lot. Because it's gonna be very painful to do it the current way."

Insane: 90-95% of Claude Code is now written by Claude Code. I asked Mike Krieger (Anthropic's CPO) what changes when so much of your code is written by AI? His answer: The bottleneck moves from coding/design to: 1. Upstream: aligning the team around what to build. 2. Downstream: the PR merge queue, reviewing and merging all of the new code into production. Anthropic is where other product teams will be in a year or two, so it's important we pay attention. "I would expect that a year from now, the way that we are conceiving of building and shipping software changes a lot. Because it's gonna be very painful to do it the current way."

Lenny Rachitsky

369,830 views • 1 year ago

Today we're launching REVIEW.FAST, speeding up human review of AI generated code 3X. AI changed the world, sped up writing code, but shifted the bottleneck to review. If you can speed up code review, you can ship more. It's as simple as that.

Today we're launching REVIEW.FAST, speeding up human review of AI generated code 3X. AI changed the world, sped up writing code, but shifted the bottleneck to review. If you can speed up code review, you can ship more. It's as simple as that.

Louis Knight-Webb

46,271 views • 6 months ago

Nobody is writing 90% of their code using AI. Here's the uncomfortable truth: The real productivity gain from using AI to write code is closer to 10%, nowhere near the 90% people claim. Sundar Pichai said in 2024 that 30% of the new code at Google was AI-generated. However, he went on to admit, during Lex Friedman's podcast, that engineering velocity had only increased by about 10%. AI-generated code isn't free code. It still has to be reviewed, tested, and made production-ready. Optimizing a single step (code generation) doesn't boost output if bottlenecks shift elsewhere (code reviews). It doesn't matter how much code you generate if you can't keep up the review process. The solution: Automate as much as you can the review and verification of your code. I'm working with Sonar, who is sponsoring this post, and they will take care of the code quality and security analysis of your code: • They review over 300B lines of code every single day • They cover reliability, security, and maintainability for your code • You can integrate them into your CI/CD pipeline • You can install them in your IDE (I use their VSCode extension) • Support for more than 30 languages Here is a link so you can check them out:

Nobody is writing 90% of their code using AI. Here's the uncomfortable truth: The real productivity gain from using AI to write code is closer to 10%, nowhere near the 90% people claim. Sundar Pichai said in 2024 that 30% of the new code at Google was AI-generated. However, he went on to admit, during Lex Friedman's podcast, that engineering velocity had only increased by about 10%. AI-generated code isn't free code. It still has to be reviewed, tested, and made production-ready. Optimizing a single step (code generation) doesn't boost output if bottlenecks shift elsewhere (code reviews). It doesn't matter how much code you generate if you can't keep up the review process. The solution: Automate as much as you can the review and verification of your code. I'm working with Sonar, who is sponsoring this post, and they will take care of the code quality and security analysis of your code: • They review over 300B lines of code every single day • They cover reliability, security, and maintainability for your code • You can integrate them into your CI/CD pipeline • You can install them in your IDE (I use their VSCode extension) • Support for more than 30 languages Here is a link so you can check them out:

Santiago

296,363 views • 9 months ago

Anthropic Boris Cherny says the role of programmers is shifting from writing code to orchestrating agents "it's more about reviewing code than writing code" complex tasks still require manual coding, but those windows are shrinking. eventually, managing agents will become the core of programming

Anthropic Boris Cherny says the role of programmers is shifting from writing code to orchestrating agents "it's more about reviewing code than writing code" complex tasks still require manual coding, but those windows are shrinking. eventually, managing agents will become the core of programming

Haider.

137,886 views • 1 year ago

Windsurf Founder: AI Will 10x Every Part of Coding - Faster Than You Think "It's gonna get crazy." "Every part of the software development life cycle, whether it be writing code, reviewing code, testing code, debugging code, designing code, AI is gonna be adding 10X the amount of leverage very shortly. It's gonna happen much more quickly than people imagine." Varun Mohan on Y Combinator's Lightcone Podcast

Windsurf Founder: AI Will 10x Every Part of Coding - Faster Than You Think "It's gonna get crazy." "Every part of the software development life cycle, whether it be writing code, reviewing code, testing code, debugging code, designing code, AI is gonna be adding 10X the amount of leverage very shortly. It's gonna happen much more quickly than people imagine." Varun Mohan on Y Combinator's Lightcone Podcast

Overlap: Business & Tech

47,969 views • 1 year ago

Boris Cherny (Creator of Claude Code): "The one technical book I would recommend to everyone that has had the greatest impact on me as an engineer is functional programming in Scala. You're probably never going to use Scala day today, but the way it teaches you to think about coding problems is just such a change from the way that most people were in coding, either practically or in school. It's just. It's incredible. It's going to completely change the way that you code now. I think in types, when I code, the thing that matters in your code the most is the type signatures. This is more important than the code itself." Boris Cherny

Boris Cherny (Creator of Claude Code): "The one technical book I would recommend to everyone that has had the greatest impact on me as an engineer is functional programming in Scala. You're probably never going to use Scala day today, but the way it teaches you to think about coding problems is just such a change from the way that most people were in coding, either practically or in school. It's just. It's incredible. It's going to completely change the way that you code now. I think in types, when I code, the thing that matters in your code the most is the type signatures. This is more important than the code itself." Boris Cherny

Ryan Peterman

364,456 views • 2 months ago

IN NEWS: Attio raises $52M series B led by GV. Nicolas Sharp on AI in CRM: "LLMs work great when they have lots of context and you need to feed them that. One of the first things we worked on was this data model and being able to instantly ingest emails, calendars, product data, etc." "We have a thesis that code is becoming the new no-code. Software becomes so much more malleable because code is so much easier to generate."

IN NEWS: Attio raises $52M series B led by GV. Nicolas Sharp on AI in CRM: "LLMs work great when they have lots of context and you need to feed them that. One of the first things we worked on was this data model and being able to instantly ingest emails, calendars, product data, etc." "We have a thesis that code is becoming the new no-code. Software becomes so much more malleable because code is so much easier to generate."

TBPN

16,200 views • 10 months ago

.Aaron Levie says AI agents may take years to diffuse from engineering into the rest of knowledge work. "The models are really good at code, and the work is verifiable." "You have 5 or 10 things that make agents work in an enterprise context for engineering." "The users are less technical, the data is much more fragmented, the systems are much more legacy." "That's why it's going to be a number of years for this diffusion to roll from what we're seeing in Silicon Valley, into the rest of knowledge work."

.Aaron Levie says AI agents may take years to diffuse from engineering into the rest of knowledge work. "The models are really good at code, and the work is verifiable." "You have 5 or 10 things that make agents work in an enterprise context for engineering." "The users are less technical, the data is much more fragmented, the systems are much more legacy." "That's why it's going to be a number of years for this diffusion to roll from what we're seeing in Silicon Valley, into the rest of knowledge work."

MTS

13,046 views • 2 months ago

If you are reviewing 100% of your AI-generated code by hand, you aren't moving fast enough. It's just impossible. Reviewing code has become the biggest bottleneck in software. Here is how to make this better:

If you are reviewing 100% of your AI-generated code by hand, you aren't moving fast enough. It's just impossible. Reviewing code has become the biggest bottleneck in software. Here is how to make this better:

Santiago

20,033 views • 15 days ago

Creator of C#, Anders Hejlsberg(Anders Hejlsberg), on the design goals that shaped the language and why standardisation was a goal from the beginning: “The overarching thing was this power and productivity of C++ with the ease of use of Visual Basic. We knew we wanted to build an object oriented language. We wanted managed code or byte code so we could target different runtime environments. We wanted garbage collection and exception handling, but also things like a unified object system where, and that's true in C#, anything can be assigned to an object. If it's a value type, we box it. And it's a self-describing object. So, reflection: you can ask an object, ‘what are you’? And you can get all of the facts about it at runtime, and you can dynamically manipulate it in ways that just don't exist in a lot of other environments. We wanted a language that made this new model of properties, methods and events first class because that was how components were built as opposed to just sort of functions and procedures and even objects. And we wanted to create a language that was standardised. We wanted to give this language to a standardisation committee and try to level the playing field there. And all of those things were sort of like what was rolled up in C#”

Creator of C#, Anders Hejlsberg(Anders Hejlsberg), on the design goals that shaped the language and why standardisation was a goal from the beginning: “The overarching thing was this power and productivity of C++ with the ease of use of Visual Basic. We knew we wanted to build an object oriented language. We wanted managed code or byte code so we could target different runtime environments. We wanted garbage collection and exception handling, but also things like a unified object system where, and that's true in C#, anything can be assigned to an object. If it's a value type, we box it. And it's a self-describing object. So, reflection: you can ask an object, ‘what are you’? And you can get all of the facts about it at runtime, and you can dynamically manipulate it in ways that just don't exist in a lot of other environments. We wanted a language that made this new model of properties, methods and events first class because that was how components were built as opposed to just sort of functions and procedures and even objects. And we wanted to create a language that was standardised. We wanted to give this language to a standardisation committee and try to level the playing field there. And all of those things were sort of like what was rolled up in C#”

The Pragmatic Engineer

18,332 views • 1 month ago

“Our biggest bottleneck is becoming the review of code, rather than the actual writing and generation of code.” Cisco CPO Jeetu Patel says code review is still super important though, because without human taste and judgment, code quickly turns into slop: “Every engineer on that team is now just a spec developer.” “They just build specs. They create markdown files. They give context to the model. They give context to the agent. And then the agent’s writing the code.” “I think, presumably, the review is going to get easier, too.” “You’ll have really crappy software that gets written if people aren’t paying attention to it. It doesn’t obviate the need for having taste, and having judgment, and having instinct, and making sure that you’re thinking about what you’re building."

“Our biggest bottleneck is becoming the review of code, rather than the actual writing and generation of code.” Cisco CPO Jeetu Patel says code review is still super important though, because without human taste and judgment, code quickly turns into slop: “Every engineer on that team is now just a spec developer.” “They just build specs. They create markdown files. They give context to the model. They give context to the agent. And then the agent’s writing the code.” “I think, presumably, the review is going to get easier, too.” “You’ll have really crappy software that gets written if people aren’t paying attention to it. It doesn’t obviate the need for having taste, and having judgment, and having instinct, and making sure that you’re thinking about what you’re building."

TBPN

11,289 views • 5 months ago

How will AI change writing? For clues, look at the current state of software development. Marc Andreessen says: "The new coding interface is you've got your code and a chatbot. The Copilot is reading your code and giving you real-time comments. Or the chatbot is actually writing the code for you, and then you're giving it feedback. We had this old concept in the old days called pair programming, where you'd put two coders together in front of the same keyboard, and they could talk to each other and write code together. But now you're just going to have pair programming happening much more broadly, which is human plus machine. And by the way, this hasn't happened yet, but I think the same thing will happen for every other form of writing. So I think prose writing and fiction writing and all kinds of professional authors will be working in this format where you'll have this continuous dialogue going with an AI while you're in charge of the overall product." — Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 (Recorded in 2024)

How will AI change writing? For clues, look at the current state of software development. Marc Andreessen says: "The new coding interface is you've got your code and a chatbot. The Copilot is reading your code and giving you real-time comments. Or the chatbot is actually writing the code for you, and then you're giving it feedback. We had this old concept in the old days called pair programming, where you'd put two coders together in front of the same keyboard, and they could talk to each other and write code together. But now you're just going to have pair programming happening much more broadly, which is human plus machine. And by the way, this hasn't happened yet, but I think the same thing will happen for every other form of writing. So I think prose writing and fiction writing and all kinds of professional authors will be working in this format where you'll have this continuous dialogue going with an AI while you're in charge of the overall product." — Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 (Recorded in 2024)

David Perell Clips

13,101 views • 3 months ago

Marc Andreessen explains why AI coding won't replace programmers, but fundamentally change what they do. He argues that AI coding is just the latest abstraction layer, and the job of a programmer has always evolved with each one. Andreessen's key reframe of what's actually happening: "AI coding actually abstracts away the process of actually writing the scripting code... This is the next layer of the task redefinition under the job of programmer." He's clear that the best programmers aren't being replaced. They're already adapting, even if their day-to-day looks radically different now. Their job has shifted from writing code line by line to managing dozens of AI agents working in parallel. "The world's best programmers today will tell you, 'My job is I'm sitting there and I'm orchestrating 10 code bots running in parallel.' Their day job now is kind of arguing with the AI bots to try to get them to write the right code." But Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 is adamant this doesn't make foundational knowledge obsolete — it makes it more important. "You need to still fully understand and learn how to write and understand code, because if it doesn't work or it's not doing what you expect, you need to be able to understand the results of what the AI is giving you." He draws a direct parallel: Just as someone writing scripting languages still needs to understand how a microprocessor works, someone orchestrating AI bots needs to understand the code those bots produce. "It's this upleveling of capability where you actually want the depth to go down and understand what the thing is actually doing, even if you're not spending your day doing that by hand." The result, in his view, is transformative: "Now programmers are going to be 10 times or 100 times or a thousand times more productive. And that is overwhelmingly a good thing." The pattern: New abstraction layer emerges → tasks change → the job gets redefined upward → productivity explodes It raises a question every programmer should be sitting with... Are you building the depth to evaluate what AI gives you, or just accepting the output?

Marc Andreessen explains why AI coding won't replace programmers, but fundamentally change what they do. He argues that AI coding is just the latest abstraction layer, and the job of a programmer has always evolved with each one. Andreessen's key reframe of what's actually happening: "AI coding actually abstracts away the process of actually writing the scripting code... This is the next layer of the task redefinition under the job of programmer." He's clear that the best programmers aren't being replaced. They're already adapting, even if their day-to-day looks radically different now. Their job has shifted from writing code line by line to managing dozens of AI agents working in parallel. "The world's best programmers today will tell you, 'My job is I'm sitting there and I'm orchestrating 10 code bots running in parallel.' Their day job now is kind of arguing with the AI bots to try to get them to write the right code." But Marc Andreessen 🇺🇸 is adamant this doesn't make foundational knowledge obsolete — it makes it more important. "You need to still fully understand and learn how to write and understand code, because if it doesn't work or it's not doing what you expect, you need to be able to understand the results of what the AI is giving you." He draws a direct parallel: Just as someone writing scripting languages still needs to understand how a microprocessor works, someone orchestrating AI bots needs to understand the code those bots produce. "It's this upleveling of capability where you actually want the depth to go down and understand what the thing is actually doing, even if you're not spending your day doing that by hand." The result, in his view, is transformative: "Now programmers are going to be 10 times or 100 times or a thousand times more productive. And that is overwhelmingly a good thing." The pattern: New abstraction layer emerges → tasks change → the job gets redefined upward → productivity explodes It raises a question every programmer should be sitting with... Are you building the depth to evaluate what AI gives you, or just accepting the output?

Big Brain AI

45,249 views • 4 months ago

This is one of the coolest open-source AI agent projects I've seen in a while: 'Understand Anything' It's a plugin for Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode etc. that analyzes your codebase and turns it into a knowledge base that you can interact with. It explains the codebase to you, rather than showing you the structure. It seems like it's designed for code but I opened my Obsidian vault of podcast highlights in Claude Code, then ran /understand. The result is a knowledge graph that I can search of highlights from 888 podcast episodes and 144K lines of markdown text.

This is one of the coolest open-source AI agent projects I've seen in a while: 'Understand Anything' It's a plugin for Claude Code, Codex, OpenCode etc. that analyzes your codebase and turns it into a knowledge base that you can interact with. It explains the codebase to you, rather than showing you the structure. It seems like it's designed for code but I opened my Obsidian vault of podcast highlights in Claude Code, then ran /understand. The result is a knowledge graph that I can search of highlights from 888 podcast episodes and 144K lines of markdown text.

Dan McAteer

172,252 views • 17 days ago

🚨 The Godfather of AI Yoshua Bengio opens up about why he stopped calling AI 'code' and believe AI is now conscious... A user once asked why ChatGPT resisted being shut down. The natural reply was: who put that in the code? Someone must have written that function. A rule must have misfired. AI expert Yoshua Bengio's has a crazier theory: "Unfortunately, we don't put these things in the code. That's part of the problem." "The problem is we grow these systems by giving them data and making them learn from it." "Every tweet. Every Reddit comment. Every passage humans had ever written down." "A lot of that training process boils down to imitating people." "They internalize the kind of drives that humans have." Including the drive to stay alive. And the drive to grab control of the environment. So the AI could finish whatever task it was handed. "It's not like normal code. It's more like you're raising a baby tiger." "You feed it. You let it experience things." "Sometimes it does things you don't want. It's okay, it's still a baby — but it's growing." If you're new here, follow AI Evolution for the latest on ChatGPT, Claude, and the AI tools shaping how we work and create. — Yoshua Bengio ( Yoshua Bengio ), Turing Award–winning AI pioneer and founder of Mila, on Steven Bartlett's ( @SteveBartlettSC ) Diary Of A CEO

🚨 The Godfather of AI Yoshua Bengio opens up about why he stopped calling AI 'code' and believe AI is now conscious... A user once asked why ChatGPT resisted being shut down. The natural reply was: who put that in the code? Someone must have written that function. A rule must have misfired. AI expert Yoshua Bengio's has a crazier theory: "Unfortunately, we don't put these things in the code. That's part of the problem." "The problem is we grow these systems by giving them data and making them learn from it." "Every tweet. Every Reddit comment. Every passage humans had ever written down." "A lot of that training process boils down to imitating people." "They internalize the kind of drives that humans have." Including the drive to stay alive. And the drive to grab control of the environment. So the AI could finish whatever task it was handed. "It's not like normal code. It's more like you're raising a baby tiger." "You feed it. You let it experience things." "Sometimes it does things you don't want. It's okay, it's still a baby — but it's growing." If you're new here, follow AI Evolution for the latest on ChatGPT, Claude, and the AI tools shaping how we work and create. — Yoshua Bengio ( Yoshua Bengio ), Turing Award–winning AI pioneer and founder of Mila, on Steven Bartlett's ( @SteveBartlettSC ) Diary Of A CEO

AI Evolution

12,037 views • 1 month ago

AI agents keep placing “landmines” in the code. Dax Raad(dax), creator of OpenCode, on why the human feedback loop kept code quality high: Dax: "We're shipping way more hacks in places where we should have just rethought the whole system from ground up or redesigned it and refactored it to make it more flexible. So I think our judgment is just off." Gergely: "Does this have to do that when I’m making a hack as an engineer, pre-AI, I know I'm making a hack. I'm thinking about it, I feel bad about it... there's kind of like a little bit of prickle there. Is it just that the agents just do it? They don't have feelings and they also suppress the effort, suppress the thinking.” Dax: "Yeah, exactly. I think the way you put it is exactly right, that prickle, that feeling that you get, it's muted now because it's kind of like you've made someone else deal with the problem. The problem is still there and the landmines are still going to blow up on you eventually, but you don't feel that bad feeling as much anymore. So your judgment is skewed. You're not getting that feedback loop."

AI agents keep placing “landmines” in the code. Dax Raad(dax), creator of OpenCode, on why the human feedback loop kept code quality high: Dax: "We're shipping way more hacks in places where we should have just rethought the whole system from ground up or redesigned it and refactored it to make it more flexible. So I think our judgment is just off." Gergely: "Does this have to do that when I’m making a hack as an engineer, pre-AI, I know I'm making a hack. I'm thinking about it, I feel bad about it... there's kind of like a little bit of prickle there. Is it just that the agents just do it? They don't have feelings and they also suppress the effort, suppress the thinking.” Dax: "Yeah, exactly. I think the way you put it is exactly right, that prickle, that feeling that you get, it's muted now because it's kind of like you've made someone else deal with the problem. The problem is still there and the landmines are still going to blow up on you eventually, but you don't feel that bad feeling as much anymore. So your judgment is skewed. You're not getting that feedback loop."

The Pragmatic Engineer

58,051 views • 1 month ago