there exists a wisdom in the involuntary, and that our attempts to shape reality, however intentional, are themselves a form of unintentional expression.
AIs don’t just repeat the same sentence patterns but also the same themes (memory is a favorite), names (Elara Voss, Marcus Chen), and underlying ideas.
But how many that give you a Git repo where you actually *own* the entire intelligence stack? Runtime, model choice, skills, tools, connectivity, sandbox…
In verifiable domains, model capability scaling should remain unbounded. Models will simply keep improving by "absorbing more and more of the computational universe", which is infinite by construction.
Maybe Nix is like Rust: Amazing if you don't have to look at the code! I'm open to the idea that Omarchy Cinque could switch packaging system if I never have to look at nixlang, there are no ergonomic regressions, and we have full repo sovereignty.
With thousands of developed in a mono repo, it just does happen that one directory is missing one of the two files and this means that a subset of devs work with lobotomy. We fix this with automation but it’s a stupid complexity tax that shouldn’t have to be paid.
Auto instrumentation has gotten so good in recent years. If you're using Open Telemetry and everyone should be using Open Telemetry. All of the common patterns like all of the models are trained on them. So, it is literally faster and easier to build with instrumentation than to than not to.
it's always weird to me just how much software engineers really seem to believe that the world exists in the repo. It doesn't. It's production, you know?
Smalltalk Best Practice Patterns. True, Kent Beck is better known for his later work, which is excellent too. But Smalltalk Best Practice Patterns is particularly strong on coding style. I learned a lot by just reading the code examples. Small tweaks to names and abstractions add up. No one captures that better than Kent.
So this speaks of a very important fact that um AI learns from patterns. When the patterns are not abundant, then we have to be careful. We have to know how to use AI or how not to use AI.
However, there's an increasing body of literature that shows that by engaging older adults in novel cognitive activities, you see improvements in function. So that can be language learning. Uh that can be uh complex like coordinative movement or exercise. You see the same things with um like musical training like people learning a new musical instrument or learning um musical theory trying to identify different patterns in music. And you see in randomized control trials improvements particularly in executive function that seems to be most common across those different interventions.
Some people think CI means you reject grammar books. I disagree. I often reference grammar materials and find these explanations useful. However, the focus of my learning is not to “master the rules”. Grammar resources simply help me notice and make sense of patterns in the language.
there's a different kind of intuition that you that you develop over years as a software engineer and uh there's many categories of it but the one I'll I'll call attention to that is like a thing that you cannot teach you cannot do you cannot learn in a textbook. The only way to learn it is like I know bad patterns in software because I have debugged them at three in the morning.
We're now doing it in a much heavier way because we find that these like kind of bory enterprisey uh patterns end up being pretty useful because you have a bunch of idiots on your team now. The coding agents are a bunch of idiots and they are going to work 24/7 and they're going to like ship a lot of stuff. So you need way more guardrails than you used to.
The thing that I find interesting is that's not novel. This has been the thing we've always been trying to do forever. How do we get a junior engineer to ship code safely without breaking stuff? Right? How do we make patterns in the codebase? How do we make tests? Like it's it's all the old stuff that we've always wanted to do.
one of the magic tricks about these things is that they they're incredibly consistent. If you've got a code base with a bunch of patterns in, they will follow those patterns almost to a T.
You know, interestingly, LM themselves are quite bad at playing chess. Like, they hallucinate moves. They look at patterns, right? They're they're very good at pattern recognition, but not so good at going super super super deep on a specific chess thing.
And this is why I say that history doesn’t repeat itself. Of course it doesn’t. It can’t possibly repeat itself because we’re always living in a constantly evolving time. But patterns of human behaviour do. And what you always get after economic crisis is political upheaval, always, always, always.
I mean, I've been doing this for over 15 years. If there were any shortcuts, I'd be all over them. There are patterns and there are frameworks, but there's no shortcuts.
An eye-opening view on considerations going into building a widely used public API or reusable library. While the book focuses on the .NET framework, many of the conventions apply to maintainable and reusable components, in general. This book had an outsized impact on me as I read it when I was a mid-level .NET developer.
This fits with some of the studies of chess experts and so forth that it’s not so much that you learn the patterns passively. You learn what to look for. You learn what’s important and what’s not.
Take the free Attachment Style Quiz and get personalised insight into how you connect, where your patterns come from, and your next step toward secure love.
Obviousness comes from conforming to people’s existing mental models. Don’t waste time reinventing common UI patterns or paradigms unless they are at least 2x better, or you have some critical brand reason to do so.
What we could we could train people by saying, "Here's the recognition prime decision model. Now, you know, follow this." And that would be useless. Because of uh telling people the strategy isn't going to buy them anything. The intuition part is a reflection of the patterns they've built up through experience. And so there's no shortcut for that.
But their lives became miserable. It would take them 45 minutes to decide what restaurant to go through. They got divorced. They lost their jobs because they could not use their emotions because our emotions are a way of drawing on on the patterns we've built and on our experiences.
A korrent is a belief a person has stated in their own words: one
sentence stating the claim, backed by a quote and a source, kept at
korrents.com.
Under a name here, the quoted block is what they actually said.
The korrent beneath it is the claim those words support, in
korrents' wording — tap it to see the record, its source, and who
else holds it.
Nobody here wrote their own korrents. They are compiled from public
statements, and a person can change their mind, which is recorded too.
About the English under a post
Some people here publish in a language other than English. Where they
do, this site shows a machine translation beneath the post, in
this typeface — the site's own, not theirs.
The post itself is never changed, moved or hidden: what is set in the
serif above is exactly what the person published, and it is what to
quote them on. A translation can be wrong in ways that matter,
especially about tone.
Only the post's own words are translated. A quoted post, a linked
article and a belief on korrents.com
are left in their original language.