- we don’t care about your pain - those in charge find it below their dignity to explain the decision to you - we don’t feel we owe you an explanation, but we’ll take your license fees - we care more about how you say things than what you say - you are helpless and we can take away your voice (here) if we want to

Now, the problem isn’t just that some people are not native English speakers — quite a few in our industry come across as not being able to “speak human”. Which makes us prone to put more emphasis on words than how different people in different states of mind read those words.

_Professionals_ de-escalate. This was not that.

Devices are not a real problem. You don’t need scale to get hold of affordable readers in bulk. There’s lots of them available and if the market were to grow, there would be even more devices. Today these devices are not very useful as putting content on them is awkward and fragmented. If that pain went away, there would be a huge market.

I think the problem is that Amazon would retaliate. And the publishing industry are too afraid of challenging them. Because they have never been able to get their act together before.

Yes, like many industries I have worked in I can imagine that they are unable to cooperate because of petty greed and short-sightedness: they would rather have the whole market taken away from them than endure the possibility that some of their direct competitors get a small, temporary advantage.

It should not be hard to create truly interoperable systems that can cut Amazon out of the equation. It isn’t a technology issue. We have technology that easily solves every conceivable aspect of distributing, paying for and consuming ebooks.

This should be the ultimate opportunity for the publishing industry. Especially given that Amazon isn’t investing much in development of devices.

The older I get the less I want to deal with companies that act like primadonnas and the technologies they make. This is also why I don’t do phone apps: your market access is 100% controlled by two companies that can wipe out your business overnight.

Imagine having to work with these people professionally. With real money involved. While probably not as high risk as mobile development, their customer representatives seem like real primadonnas. You’ll be happier without these people in your life.

Why would you think that contactless payment would require Visa or Mastercard?

The problem is currently being addressed at the low level. I think we have to go higher up the food chain and go after the data brokers.

First the systems have to be up. Then we can deal with the spying and nonsense.

The open question is not “can next-token prediction produce impressive behavior?” Clearly it can. The question is whether scaling that mechanism is enough to produce stable world models, grounded understanding, long-horizon agency, self-correction, and reliable reasoning across novel situations.

That has not been demonstrated.

In the past few years I've repeated the same thing: I'm not afraid of AIs that are hallucinating. They do that by design. It is expected. What scares me is people who hallucinate something into existence which isn't there.

And if the apocalypse comes, I'm actually not that bad at a handful of skilled blue collar jobs.

The people who should be worried are the ones with narrow skill-sets and no capacity for dealing with rapid change. Especially if those skills are shallow too.

But I wasn't talking about people. I was talking about companies. And the reason I'm not worried about companies going under is that they have gone all the time since the start of the industrial revolution. Yes, it happens faster and more violently today than before but neither the churn nor the reasons are all that new. They just need to be understood so you can deal with change rationally and without panicking.

It is a good idea to read up on historic innovation/disruption cycles and realize that they are nothing new. The only reason people think this is a new problem is that 50-100 years ago they used to take about as much time as your productive career. So people wouldn't need to understand how to deal with it. And every generation would be convinced that this is some unexpected and unique upheaval that only their generation has to deal with.

My stance is the only one that works well during disruption: you make sure you have more legs to stand on and you don't waste time fretting over things you can't change. If you find yourself out of options, you can only blame yourself.

The reason I just remembered that is that the other day they proudly announced that everyone in their company would now be vibe-coding exclusively.

Agentic coding changed that. A bit.

I still dislike most functional languages because my brain doesn't work with their syntax, but these languages are REALLY good targets for agentic coding.

I'm a backend developer who occasionally needs a frontend slapped onto something. So I have been through all the usual suspects. Angular, React, Vue. All terrible reminders of why I try to stay away from the frontend. Touch it and you roll around in tons of dysfunctional tooling, weird complexity and gimmicky mechanisms that are ridiculously fragile. It isn't just as if a bunch of cats wrote the code, but they are feral cats. And if you point out just how messy things are, they just hiss at you and piss on your shoes.

And then I discovered Elm. Not only does it not crap all over my git repository, LLMs love Elm. Yes, it poops out a JS blob. But I don't have to look at it. I can just pick it up with my long tongs and drop it into my server using embed.FS in Go.

Perhaps I should overcome my peculiarities and love Elm too.

Anyway.

Anything that can make Python go away I'm for. It is not for writing programs that will ever leave your workstation and be inflicted on others.

Writing code just isn't what takes time.

Or are you saying that I'm lying. That I am secretly hammering away at my keyboard while pretending not to?

No, writing code hasn't been how I spend most of my time for many decades now.