Загрузка видео...

Не удалось загрузить видео

На главную

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...

slash1sol's profile picture

slash1s

9,553 subscribers

22,107 просмотров • 1 месяц назад •via X (Twitter)

LIVE

Anya Rossi• Live Now

Private livecam show

Комментарии: 0

Нет доступных комментариев

Здесь появятся комментарии из оригинального поста

Похожие видео

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 ↓
42:24

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

384,696 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

A DEVELOPER WALKED ON STAGE DRESSED AS A 1973 ENGINEER AND "PREDICTED" THE FUTURE OF PROGRAMMING. THE TWIST: EVERYTHING HE DESCRIBED WAS ALREADY INVENTED 40 YEARS EARLIER AND WE STILL REFUSE TO USE IT. 32 minutes from Bret Victor, doing the most quietly savage talk on our entire industry. -> The idea that lands: we write code as step-by-step text instructions and call that "Just how programming is". He shows four better ways -- all discovered in the 60s and 70s, all abandoned. Manipulate the data directly instead of typing blind code. Tell the machine your goal instead of every tiny step. We saw all this, then walked away. Why? The moment you're sure you know what programming is, you stop seeing anything better. That certainty is the cage. And now AI is dragging us back to exactly what he begged for -- you describe the goal in plain words, the machine works out the how. The future he mourned is arriving anyway. You thought text files were just how code works. This is the talk that shows it was a choice, and maybe the wrong one. Watch this one. It'll ruin how you see your job ↓
32:29

A DEVELOPER WALKED ON STAGE DRESSED AS A 1973 ENGINEER AND "PREDICTED" THE FUTURE OF PROGRAMMING. THE TWIST: EVERYTHING HE DESCRIBED WAS ALREADY INVENTED 40 YEARS EARLIER AND WE STILL REFUSE TO USE IT. 32 minutes from Bret Victor, doing the most quietly savage talk on our entire industry. -> The idea that lands: we write code as step-by-step text instructions and call that "Just how programming is". He shows four better ways -- all discovered in the 60s and 70s, all abandoned. Manipulate the data directly instead of typing blind code. Tell the machine your goal instead of every tiny step. We saw all this, then walked away. Why? The moment you're sure you know what programming is, you stop seeing anything better. That certainty is the cage. And now AI is dragging us back to exactly what he begged for -- you describe the goal in plain words, the machine works out the how. The future he mourned is arriving anyway. You thought text files were just how code works. This is the talk that shows it was a choice, and maybe the wrong one. Watch this one. It'll ruin how you see your job ↓

slash1s

685,846 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

“Math is code. And code is math.” Carina Hong CEO Axiom on why that idea matters for AI: “For centuries, mathematicians reasoned in natural language. But because of the Curry–Howard correspondence, a proof can also be a program.” “You can translate natural-language math into formal code using systems like Lean. Lean is both a theorem-proving language and a programming language.” “That means you can generate solutions as code and then formally verify them. You can even use the same system to verify programs themselves.” “This creates a flywheel of generation and verification, where AI can both write solutions and prove that they’re correct.”
2:25

“Math is code. And code is math.” Carina Hong CEO Axiom on why that idea matters for AI: “For centuries, mathematicians reasoned in natural language. But because of the Curry–Howard correspondence, a proof can also be a program.” “You can translate natural-language math into formal code using systems like Lean. Lean is both a theorem-proving language and a programming language.” “That means you can generate solutions as code and then formally verify them. You can even use the same system to verify programs themselves.” “This creates a flywheel of generation and verification, where AI can both write solutions and prove that they’re correct.”

Forward Future

24,729 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

IN 1986 MIT FILMED A LECTURE THAT OPENS BY TELLING YOU COMPUTER SCIENCE IS NOT A SCIENCE AND HAS ALMOST NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPUTERS 72 minutes from Hal Abelson and Gerald Sussman, the lecture an entire generation of engineers calls the one that rewired how they think. -> The line that lands: computer science is about computers the way astronomy is about telescopes. The tool was never the point. The real subject was always one thing -- controlling complexity. Everything else is detail. Forty years later it reads like a prophecy. AI writes the syntax now. What's left is exactly what they taught: taming complexity nobody can hold in their head. The language was never the skill -> the thinking was. This is where you learn it. Most people chase the newest framework. The ones who watched this think on a level frameworks can't touch. Bookmark & Watch today it, this one's a legend ↓
1:12:24

IN 1986 MIT FILMED A LECTURE THAT OPENS BY TELLING YOU COMPUTER SCIENCE IS NOT A SCIENCE AND HAS ALMOST NOTHING TO DO WITH COMPUTERS 72 minutes from Hal Abelson and Gerald Sussman, the lecture an entire generation of engineers calls the one that rewired how they think. -> The line that lands: computer science is about computers the way astronomy is about telescopes. The tool was never the point. The real subject was always one thing -- controlling complexity. Everything else is detail. Forty years later it reads like a prophecy. AI writes the syntax now. What's left is exactly what they taught: taming complexity nobody can hold in their head. The language was never the skill -> the thinking was. This is where you learn it. Most people chase the newest framework. The ones who watched this think on a level frameworks can't touch. Bookmark & Watch today it, this one's a legend ↓

slash1s

361,947 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

THE ENGINE DIRECTOR BEHIND AAA CONSOLE GAMES WALKED ON STAGE AT A C++ CONFERENCE AND TOLD A ROOM OF EXPERTS THAT THE CLEAN, OBJECT ORIENTED CODE THEY ARE PROUD OF IS A LIE AND IT QUIETLY THROWS AWAY 90% OF THE MACHINE THEY PAID FOR 85 minutes from Mike Acton -- engine director at Insomniac Games, where wasting cycles is not an abstract debate, it is the difference between a game that ships and one that dies. -> His first principle is blunt: the only purpose of any program is to transform data. Not to model the world in pretty classes. Move data, fast. 06:33 -- The lie he calls out: "Software is the platform". No. The hardware is the platform. Ignore it and you cannot even reason about the cost of your own code. Most devs never look at what the CPU actually does. They stack abstractions until the machine spends its life waiting on memory it should never have touched. 49:38 -- He prints a value, zips it, and measures the waste directly. A brutal little trick that exposes how much of your data is pure noise. And this is the AI era's blind spot too. Agents generate more abstract code faster, on hardware nobody profiles, while the GPU bill quietly explodes. You thought clean code was the goal. This is the man shipping real engines saying the machine is the goal, and clean code is often how you lose it. Bookmark it & you'll never look at your own abstractions the same ↓
1:25:35

THE ENGINE DIRECTOR BEHIND AAA CONSOLE GAMES WALKED ON STAGE AT A C++ CONFERENCE AND TOLD A ROOM OF EXPERTS THAT THE CLEAN, OBJECT ORIENTED CODE THEY ARE PROUD OF IS A LIE AND IT QUIETLY THROWS AWAY 90% OF THE MACHINE THEY PAID FOR 85 minutes from Mike Acton -- engine director at Insomniac Games, where wasting cycles is not an abstract debate, it is the difference between a game that ships and one that dies. -> His first principle is blunt: the only purpose of any program is to transform data. Not to model the world in pretty classes. Move data, fast. 06:33 -- The lie he calls out: "Software is the platform". No. The hardware is the platform. Ignore it and you cannot even reason about the cost of your own code. Most devs never look at what the CPU actually does. They stack abstractions until the machine spends its life waiting on memory it should never have touched. 49:38 -- He prints a value, zips it, and measures the waste directly. A brutal little trick that exposes how much of your data is pure noise. And this is the AI era's blind spot too. Agents generate more abstract code faster, on hardware nobody profiles, while the GPU bill quietly explodes. You thought clean code was the goal. This is the man shipping real engines saying the machine is the goal, and clean code is often how you lose it. Bookmark it & you'll never look at your own abstractions the same ↓

slash1s

172,488 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

IN 1999 MIT FILMED A MATH LECTURE THAT QUIETLY BECAME THE FOUNDATION OF EVERY AI MODEL YOU'VE EVER USED AND ALMOST NO ONE WAS TAUGHT TO SEE IT THAT WAY 39 minutes from Gilbert Strang, who taught this at MIT for over 60 years -- the linear algebra course an entire generation of engineers and data scientists grew up on. -> The shift it creates: you stop seeing matrices as boring grids of numbers and start seeing them as the language of space, data, and motion itself. School drilled you to crunch matrices by hand and never told you why. Strang shows you what they actually mean. Every neural net, every embedding, every model you prompt is linear algebra running underneath. The math you skipped is the engine of the thing you use all day. Memorizing the steps was never the skill -> seeing what the numbers do is. This is where it finally clicks. Most people fear linear algebra and move on. The ones who watched this see straight into how AI actually works. Bookmark & Watch it today, this one's a legend ↓
39:31

IN 1999 MIT FILMED A MATH LECTURE THAT QUIETLY BECAME THE FOUNDATION OF EVERY AI MODEL YOU'VE EVER USED AND ALMOST NO ONE WAS TAUGHT TO SEE IT THAT WAY 39 minutes from Gilbert Strang, who taught this at MIT for over 60 years -- the linear algebra course an entire generation of engineers and data scientists grew up on. -> The shift it creates: you stop seeing matrices as boring grids of numbers and start seeing them as the language of space, data, and motion itself. School drilled you to crunch matrices by hand and never told you why. Strang shows you what they actually mean. Every neural net, every embedding, every model you prompt is linear algebra running underneath. The math you skipped is the engine of the thing you use all day. Memorizing the steps was never the skill -> seeing what the numbers do is. This is where it finally clicks. Most people fear linear algebra and move on. The ones who watched this see straight into how AI actually works. Bookmark & Watch it today, this one's a legend ↓

slash1s

433,431 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

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.
3:44

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 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

"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."
1:12

"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 просмотров • 6 месяцев назад

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 ↓
27:10

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 просмотров • 2 месяцев назад

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.
3:25

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

64,425 просмотров • 8 месяцев назад

Bash is all you need! Which is why I'm introducing my holiday project: just-bash just-bash is a pretty complete implementation of bash in TypeScript designed to be used as a bash tool by AI agents. Because it turns out agents love exploring data via shell scripts, even beyond coding. It comes with grep, sed, awk and the 99th percentile features that an agent like Claude Code or Cursor would use. In fact, Claude Code can use it for secure bash execution. In the package - A bash-tool for AI SDK - A binary for use by yourself or your coding agents - An overlay filesystem to feed files to your agent securely - A Vercel Sandbox compatible API, so you can quickly upgrade to a real VM if you need to run binaries - An example AI agent that explores the just-bash code base using just-bash - I imported the Oils shell bash compatibility suite and just-bash passes a very good chunk What is interesting about this codebase: It was essentially entirely written by Opus 4.5. Coding agents love bash and they are good at reproducing it. They are also great at text-book recursive descent parsers and AST tweet-walk interpreters. That said, it is, like, a lot of code and I didn't read it all 😅. This is very much a hack, but it also seems to be _really_ useful. I haven't really found anything agents want to use that it doesn't support and it's fast and secure (caveats apply). It doesn't have write access to your computer and the filesystem is given a root that the agent cannot escape from. Find it at Related: Our recent blog post how we migrated our data analysis agent to bash tools and achieved incredible quality improvements The video shows the example agent investigating the just-bash code base
1:47

Bash is all you need! Which is why I'm introducing my holiday project: just-bash just-bash is a pretty complete implementation of bash in TypeScript designed to be used as a bash tool by AI agents. Because it turns out agents love exploring data via shell scripts, even beyond coding. It comes with grep, sed, awk and the 99th percentile features that an agent like Claude Code or Cursor would use. In fact, Claude Code can use it for secure bash execution. In the package - A bash-tool for AI SDK - A binary for use by yourself or your coding agents - An overlay filesystem to feed files to your agent securely - A Vercel Sandbox compatible API, so you can quickly upgrade to a real VM if you need to run binaries - An example AI agent that explores the just-bash code base using just-bash - I imported the Oils shell bash compatibility suite and just-bash passes a very good chunk What is interesting about this codebase: It was essentially entirely written by Opus 4.5. Coding agents love bash and they are good at reproducing it. They are also great at text-book recursive descent parsers and AST tweet-walk interpreters. That said, it is, like, a lot of code and I didn't read it all 😅. This is very much a hack, but it also seems to be _really_ useful. I haven't really found anything agents want to use that it doesn't support and it's fast and secure (caveats apply). It doesn't have write access to your computer and the filesystem is given a root that the agent cannot escape from. Find it at Related: Our recent blog post how we migrated our data analysis agent to bash tools and achieved incredible quality improvements The video shows the example agent investigating the just-bash code base

Malte Ubl

125,326 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

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."
2:04

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."

The Pragmatic Engineer

39,011 просмотров • 3 месяцев назад

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
0:26

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

365,032 просмотров • 4 месяцев назад

I love the game of Boggle. This demo showcases our Gemini 2.0 Pro model’s coding abilities in AI Studio. It is mind boggling to think that it can write the full piece of code, including all the right data structures and search algorithms to find all valid words on a Boggle board from a relatively simple prompt asking it to do so. As a computer scientist, I'm also happy that it got its data structures right on the first trie. Discombobulating!
0:41

I love the game of Boggle. This demo showcases our Gemini 2.0 Pro model’s coding abilities in AI Studio. It is mind boggling to think that it can write the full piece of code, including all the right data structures and search algorithms to find all valid words on a Boggle board from a relatively simple prompt asking it to do so. As a computer scientist, I'm also happy that it got its data structures right on the first trie. Discombobulating!

Jeff Dean

122,248 просмотров • 1 год назад

Anthropic Developer Andrej Karpathy: "At OpenAI I saw two types of engineers: ones who write every instruction - ones who describe what they want The second type replaced the first in a year " the Karpathy framework - 3 eras of programming: 1.0 → you write the code → takes weeks 2.0 → you feed data, model writes the algorithm → takes hours 3.0 → you describe what you want in English → takes minutes each era killed the last. most people are still in 1.0 "the best code is the code you never write. you don't program the solution - you program the data -the solution programs itself" he built this at OpenAI - now applies it at Anthropic - the framework never changed watch & save - guide about Software by Andrej ↓
19:02

Anthropic Developer Andrej Karpathy: "At OpenAI I saw two types of engineers: ones who write every instruction - ones who describe what they want The second type replaced the first in a year " the Karpathy framework - 3 eras of programming: 1.0 → you write the code → takes weeks 2.0 → you feed data, model writes the algorithm → takes hours 3.0 → you describe what you want in English → takes minutes each era killed the last. most people are still in 1.0 "the best code is the code you never write. you don't program the solution - you program the data -the solution programs itself" he built this at OpenAI - now applies it at Anthropic - the framework never changed watch & save - guide about Software by Andrej ↓

codila

106,761 просмотров • 1 месяц назад

"Claude Code is the first AI tool that can actually recreate how a data scientist thinks." Here's my new episode with Sumeet Marwaha (Head of Data at Brex) on exactly how to build an AI analyst with Claude Code. We covered: ✅ 3 queries to build a data analyst MCP ✅ How to give the analyst both data + context ✅ Exclusive Brex data on which AI tools are crushing it in startups and enterprise Some quotes from Sumeet: "I've set up dashboards many times in my career. They end up getting ignored. Claude will always read it. Claude will always ask the right questions." "You have to set up Claude Code to not just look at the data. It should be able to search Slack, find the incident, and understand why your metrics look wrong." "This tool is absolutely crushing it based on our data. It's both the startup AND enterprise coding tool of choice." 📌 Watch now:
0:46

"Claude Code is the first AI tool that can actually recreate how a data scientist thinks." Here's my new episode with Sumeet Marwaha (Head of Data at Brex) on exactly how to build an AI analyst with Claude Code. We covered: ✅ 3 queries to build a data analyst MCP ✅ How to give the analyst both data + context ✅ Exclusive Brex data on which AI tools are crushing it in startups and enterprise Some quotes from Sumeet: "I've set up dashboards many times in my career. They end up getting ignored. Claude will always read it. Claude will always ask the right questions." "You have to set up Claude Code to not just look at the data. It should be able to search Slack, find the incident, and understand why your metrics look wrong." "This tool is absolutely crushing it based on our data. It's both the startup AND enterprise coding tool of choice." 📌 Watch now:

Peter Yang

39,600 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад

your eval measured one system. production ran another. they start from the same idea and end somewhere else, which is why the number was right and the outcome was not. the code is the same until someone rewrites it for prod, because the eval lived in a notebook and prod is a service. then the data diverges. clean fixtures in the test, late and incomplete data in the run. then execution diverges. the eval assumed every call lands. production has retries, timeouts and rate limits. by the end the two runs share a name and nothing else. > why nobody catches it both sides are internally correct. the eval measured what it ran. production ran what it was given. neither one is wrong, and neither one is responsible for checking they were the same artifact. so the gap widens quietly. someone patches prod without touching the eval. someone adds a fixture without touching prod. no test anywhere fails. > what to actually do ship one artifact. the code that was measured is the code that runs. model the friction. whatever the real environment charges you, charge it in the eval too. easiest way to see the gap on your own idea, without writing the harness: (only first 100 registrated) it runs the tested code live, unchanged. that is the whole point. and treat the eval as a prior, not a result. it tells you what to expect. only the live run tells you what happened. your eval was accurate. it was accurate about something you never shipped.
0:49

your eval measured one system. production ran another. they start from the same idea and end somewhere else, which is why the number was right and the outcome was not. the code is the same until someone rewrites it for prod, because the eval lived in a notebook and prod is a service. then the data diverges. clean fixtures in the test, late and incomplete data in the run. then execution diverges. the eval assumed every call lands. production has retries, timeouts and rate limits. by the end the two runs share a name and nothing else. > why nobody catches it both sides are internally correct. the eval measured what it ran. production ran what it was given. neither one is wrong, and neither one is responsible for checking they were the same artifact. so the gap widens quietly. someone patches prod without touching the eval. someone adds a fixture without touching prod. no test anywhere fails. > what to actually do ship one artifact. the code that was measured is the code that runs. model the friction. whatever the real environment charges you, charge it in the eval too. easiest way to see the gap on your own idea, without writing the harness: (only first 100 registrated) it runs the tested code live, unchanged. that is the whole point. and treat the eval as a prior, not a result. it tells you what to expect. only the live run tells you what happened. your eval was accurate. it was accurate about something you never shipped.

Hanako

45,239 просмотров • 12 дней назад

Introducing "codebase to course", a skill that turns any codebase into an interactive coding course So that you can learn coding through your own projects, complete with visualization, plain-English code translations, metaphors, even quizzes... I vibe code a lot but have no idea how the code works under the hood. This is how I think "learning to code" should be in the AI age: Build first, learn later Link below
2:22

Introducing "codebase to course", a skill that turns any codebase into an interactive coding course So that you can learn coding through your own projects, complete with visualization, plain-English code translations, metaphors, even quizzes... I vibe code a lot but have no idea how the code works under the hood. This is how I think "learning to code" should be in the AI age: Build first, learn later Link below

Zara Zhang

206,251 просмотров • 5 месяцев назад

Amjad Masad on AI as the next programming abstraction: “A hundred years ago people were coding in machine code. Not many people in the world can do machine code. And then Grace Hopper said, ‘I want to invent a compiler so that people can program in English.’” Replit ⠕ CEO Amjad Masad at the Cerebral Valley AI Summit
1:10

Amjad Masad on AI as the next programming abstraction: “A hundred years ago people were coding in machine code. Not many people in the world can do machine code. And then Grace Hopper said, ‘I want to invent a compiler so that people can program in English.’” Replit ⠕ CEO Amjad Masad at the Cerebral Valley AI Summit

a16z

27,953 просмотров • 7 месяцев назад