I mostly do TDD with TypeScript. I write the test, write the code myself (sometimes with the help of LLM), and then hand it to the LLM. Instead of asking it to write things for me, I use it to find edge cases, check if it's leak-proof, and verify efficiency.

For architecture questions, I debate with it for a while. I almost never ask for code without conversing 4-5 times first to push back on its assumptions. It's the best rubber-ducking partner I've had.

Personal plug: I wrote more about why/how I use AI to write slow, better code on my blog: https://nabraj.com/blog/ai-write-slow-better-code

My blog: nabraj(dot)com

Looking for: Senior full-stack, backend, or platform engineering roles.

Location: Vancouver, BC, Canada. Open to remote US opportunities.

Tech: TypeScript/JavaScript, Python, React, Next.js, Node.js, GraphQL, PostgreSQL, MongoDB, Kafka, RabbitMQ.

Email: ntemail@protonmail.com

I don’t engage. I mark as spam, block the sender/domain, and move on.

Lately I've been doing the same for other small utilities. Roughly half the little tools I use are ones I generated and kept because they’re predictable and easy to audit.

The point isn't replacing built-ins; it's reducing dependence on shifting defaults. I want to care less about what the software/os vendor changes this time.

https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47006108

Credit to @dang and the moderation team for keeping it that way.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=47006108

Points: 5

# Comments: 2

I'd highly recommend giving it a shot.

For home: Bidet

For personal: Kindle

You should automate this, maybe drive all of these content from a json file and accept PRs.

---

My blog: https://nabraj.com/

Most popular: Why is boarding a plane still a mess? (https://nabraj.com/blog/boarding-methods)

Negative posts outperform because they create unfinished cognitive work. A clean, agreeable story closes the loop, a contested claim or engagement opens and follows the open loop.

Comments URL: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=46502956

Points: 3

# Comments: 0

The REST client went surprisingly smoothly once I committed to keeping it boring.

I'm building Mac apps in Xcode, and I keep multiple small apps in a single Xcode project with a few shared libraries (basic UI components, buttons, layout helpers, etc. to keep all my apps similar).

The REST client is literally just another target + essentially one extra file on top of that. No workspaces, no collections, no sync, no plugins. Just method, URL, headers, body, hit send, show response. Requests are saved and loaded as plain local JSON.

What surprised me is how little code is actually required once you strip away "product features".

The motivation isn't novelty. It's control. I don't need ads, onboarding flows and popups, AI sidebars, bloated menus, unnecessary network calls , etc. A notepad should never touch the network. A REST client shouldn’t ship analytics or auto update itself mid-request.

No plugin system. No extensibility story. Just plain/simple software.

As I build these, I have been realizing how much cognitive overhead we’ve normalized in exchange for very little utility.

Additionally, we might need better categories. With software, flow is clear (source, build and binary) but with AI/ML, the actual source is an unshippable mix of data, infra and time, and weights can be both product and artifacts.

AI stays the top story but in a boring way as novelty wears off and models get cheaper and faster (maybe even more embedded). No AGI moment. LLMs start feeling like databases or cloud compute.

No SpaceX or OpenAI IPO moment. Capital markets quietly reward the boring winners instead. S&P 500 grinds out another double digit year, mostly because earnings keep up and alternatives still look worse. Tech discourse stays apocalyptic, but balance sheets don't.

If you mute politics and social media noise, 2026 probably looks like one of those years that we later remember as "stable" in retrospect.

Bonus: Bitcoin sees both 50k and 150k.