<rss version="2.0" xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"><channel><title>Hacker News: anself</title><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/user?id=anself</link><description>Hacker News RSS</description><docs>https://hnrss.org/</docs><generator>hnrss v2.1.1</generator><lastBuildDate>Wed, 29 Jul 2026 13:15:36 +0000</lastBuildDate><atom:link href="https://hnrss.org/user?id=anself" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml"></atom:link><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "If coding has been solved, why does software keep getting worse?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Who ever said coding is solved??</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 25 Jul 2026 00:03:11 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49043080</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49043080</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49043080</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "You need to let the AI cook"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I agree, don't pre-emptively put too much control over your agents. But they do need guidelines and guardrails. All of the constraints I've added on my agents, I've added because when I let them cook, they went down the wrong path. 
Examples:<p>* Don't do ad-hoc fixes. Don't mutate the production data just to fix an issue. Fix the bug, ingest the bad data in code if necessary, or write a migration/repair script that an ops agent can run.
* Write infrastructure as code, don't rely on remembering complex manual workflows.
* Make sure there's a single model in the app with a single source of truth. Don't let truth get spread out across representations, it will get out of sync and bugs will result. Derived truths can be projected from the single truth, but they must update when the truth updates.
* Write all logic in the application server, and send only a minimal visible payload to the web client. No calculations, except those needed for rendering the view, should happen in the client.<p>It goes on. These are all driven from the model making mistakes and having to have it go back and refactor to correct them.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 24 Jul 2026 16:05:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49037646</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49037646</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=49037646</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Optimism associated with exceptional longevity (2019)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Pessimists are going to read this and call BS</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Wed, 05 Nov 2025 14:24:38 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45823172</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45823172</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45823172</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Why are interviews harder than the job?"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>The 100m / 10k analogy is fantastic, but the reality is even worse. 
Let’s say you expect a candidate to stay for average five years. That’s about 1200 working days. If you get to interview them for 1 day, then that day is 8.3m to the 10k. You get to watch them run for 8.3m and decide how well they can run the 10k.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 29 Sep 2025 13:52:49 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45413841</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45413841</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45413841</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Escapee pregnancy test frogs colonised Wales for 50 years (2019)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Came here to say this!
So many ways to parse it. But the key issue was not knowing that “pregnancy-test frogs” was the central concept. Without that, the headline is <i>so</i> confusing… at some point I had to consider whether “frogs” was being used as a verb</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 20 Sep 2025 13:28:20 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45313205</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45313205</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=45313205</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Fast machines, slow machines (2023)"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Too much developers relying on bloatware, not enough “implement it yourself” because in reality every hash map doves a unique problem that a Palin hash map is not necessarily suited for. Embrace NIH</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Thu, 15 May 2025 12:42:46 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43994402</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43994402</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43994402</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Business books are entertainment, not strategic tools"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>You need at least one or two somewhat disagreeable folks in a team. Because without this, groupthink emerges, teams have too much inertia, they follow the assumed norm instead of challenging it for something better, they don’t debate the options enough. That disagreeable energy, in the right dose, leads to better decisions. If you don’t have it naturally, you can encourage someone to “play devil’s advocate” in decision discussions (or do it yourself) and you’ll find sometimes the devil’s advocate is actually right.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2025 05:22:43 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43943417</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43943417</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43943417</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Business books are entertainment, not strategic tools"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Agree - but The Goal (Eliyahu Goldratt) is a rare exception to this. It’s written as a novel but actually contains valuable and counterintuitive lessons about optimizing for efficiency in a complex delivery process. Worth every page</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 10 May 2025 05:15:51 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43943394</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43943394</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43943394</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Semantic unit testing: test code without executing it"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Agree, it's not testing. The problem is here: "In a typical testing workflow, you write some basic tests to check the core functionality. When a bug inevitably shows up—usually after deployment—you go back and add more tests to cover it. This process is reactive, time-consuming, and frankly, a bit tedious."<p>This is exactly the problem that TDD solves. One of the most compelling reasons for test-first is because "Running the code in your head" does not actually work well in practice, leading to the above-cited issues. This is just another variant of "Running the code in your head" except an LLM is doing it. Strong TDD practices (don't write any code without a test to support it) will close those gaps. It may feel tedious at first but the safety it creates will leave you never wanting to go back.<p>Where this could be safe and useful: Find gaps in the test-set. Places where the code was never written because there wasn't a test to drive it out. This is one of the hardest parts of TDD, and where LLMs could really help.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 05 May 2025 07:34:03 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43892688</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43892688</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43892688</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Tarpit ideas: What they are and how to avoid them (2023) [video]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>I don’t think there’s zero demand recommendation apps, a lot of founders choose this because it’s a problem they want to solve for themselves, and there are a few success stories out there. It’s just that it’s a super-hard problem</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:41:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43789081</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43789081</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43789081</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "Tarpit ideas: What they are and how to avoid them (2023) [video]"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Is there a way to consume this in text instead? Video is far too slow and cumbersome and requires headphones</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Fri, 25 Apr 2025 00:36:37 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43789042</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43789042</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=43789042</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "No one is disrupting banks – at least not the big ones"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Having worked in banking for many years (no longer), I can say with confidence, the big banks have a giant moat: regulation.<p>They want to be heavily regulated so that new upstart competitors will not come in and spoil their cozy space. And it’s easy to justify because terrorism, money laundering, insider trading, etc etc. And many of these regulations are largely ineffective and easily worked around, whilst costing billions to the banks to comply with. Hence the moat.<p>We won’t get banking disruption until there’s banking deregulation.</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Mon, 27 Jan 2025 06:26:35 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42838025</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42838025</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=42838025</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "The shortest, strangest engineering interview I've ever done"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Aren’t “utterly toxic” and “scammer” kinda the same thing? The only difference is the intention, and does that really matter?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Tue, 20 Aug 2024 14:24:04 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41300355</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41300355</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=41300355</guid></item><item><title><![CDATA[New comment by anself in "South Pole Water Infrastructure"]]></title><description><![CDATA[
<p>Where did the wastewater go before the first rodwell was finished?</p>
]]></description><pubDate>Sat, 08 Jun 2024 10:50:36 +0000</pubDate><link>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40616722</link><dc:creator>anself</dc:creator><comments>https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40616722</comments><guid isPermaLink="false">https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=40616722</guid></item></channel></rss>