I can't watch Northern Exposure anymore. It's too alienated from the modern world, it feels like an artifact from a different civilization rather than anything I can relate to now, which is sad.

Everything Elon does is somehow stupid or evil. Actually, that reminds me of Thunderf00t YouTube streams where he was (or still is?) betting Starship would fail miserably every test flight, and he'd talk about how evil and stupid Elon is for 3 hours with chatters, watch the flight then say something like "it's still bullshit."

I think it's a mixture of cope and a little bit psyop from adversaries like Russia who are being crippled in Ukraine because of Starlink.

It also looks like the final form of the AI roll-out: whatever the model or application, this is the era of agents, and probably in the near-future mostly automated agents. We'll see an overflow of bespoke automation and in-house agents doing everything from personal task management to enterprise business processes, so releasing a "Personal Fitness Tracker" or a "CRO Auditor" in 2026 doesn't make any sense.

All of my anxiety around it has evaporated because I can see what it actually is: an ouroboros of AI output generating automation of more AI output. What most software engineers will be working on now is guiding that output, making it easier to inspect/configure it, optimizing it, and improving the consumer and developer experience.

Otherwise, we just have to drop our old concepts for projects and work on something else.

For the consumer the floor is rising, and for the experienced developer the ceiling is rising. I personally hate web dev anyway, and I'm glad I can work on interesting engineering problems (even with the help of an AI) instead of having to manually stitch together yet another REST API, or website, or service pipeline.

More than anything I'm getting frustrated with HN discussions because people just insinuate that I'm stupid instead of making substantive arguments reasoning how what I'm saying is wrong.

Are we performing for an audience or having a discussion?

You can implement progressive disclosure in MCP as well by implementing those same help commands as tools. The MCP should not be providing thousands of tools, but the minimum set of tools to help the AI use the service. If your service is small, you can probably distill the entire API into MCP tools. If you're AWS then you provide tools that then document the API progressively.

Technically, you could have an AWS MCP provide one tool that guides the AI on how to use specific AWS services through search/keywords and some kind of cursor logic.

The entire point of MCP is inherent knowledge of a tool for agentic use.

"MCPs needs to implement stateful behavior" - also doesn't make any sense. Why would an MCP need to implement stateful behavior? It is essentially just an API for agents to use.

Self-describing APIs require probing through calls, they don't tell you what you need to know before you interact with them.

MCP servers are very simple to implement, and the developers of the app/service maintain the server so you don't have to create or update skills with incomplete understanding of the system.

Your skill file is going to drift from the actual API as the app updates. You're going to have to manage it, instead of the developers of the app. I don't understand what you're even talking about.

Connected MCP tools are also always in the model's context, and it works for any AI agent that supports MCP, not just Claude Code.

Now let's say you want all your Claude Code sessions to use this calendar app so that you can always say something like "ah yes, do I have availability on Saturday for this meeting?" and the AI will look at the schedule to find out.

What's the best way to create this persistent connection to the calendar app? I think it's obviously an MCP server.

In the calendar app I provide a built-in MCP server that gives the following tools to agents: read_calendar, and update_calendar. You open Claude Code and connect to the MCP server, and configure it to connect to the MCP for all sessions - and you're done. You don't have to explain what the calendar app is, when to use it, or how to use it.

Explain to me a better solution.

MCP is more for a back and forth communication between agent and app/service, or for providing tool/API awareness during other tasks. Like MCP for Jira would let the AI know it can grab tickets from Jira when needed while working on other things.

I guess it's more like: the MCP isn't for us - it's for the agent to decide when to use.

- If you need to interact with a local app in a one-off session, then use CLI.

- If you need to interact with an online service in a one-off session, then use their API.

- If you need to interact with a local app in a persistent manner, and if that app provides an MCP server, use it.

- If you need to interact with an online service in a persistent manner, and if that app provides an MCP server, use it.

Whether the MCP server is implemented well is a whole other question. A properly configured MCP explains to the agent how to use it without too much context bloat. Not using a proper MCP for persistent access, and instead trying to describe the interaction yourself with skill files, just doesn't make any sense. The MCP owner should be optimizing the prompts to help the agent use it effectively.

MCP is the absolute best and most effective way to integrate external tools into your agent sessions. I don't understand what the arguments are against that statement?

What are you even trying to say? That these projects are totally fake? AI generated or something? Like the Moon landing was fake?

Also SpaceX, Tesla, PayPal, OpenAI, Grok and Neuralink aren't vaporware...

The claim fundamentally doesn't make any sense.

I don't really understand why these kinds of comments persist except as some pathological cope when confronted with a world that doesn't work the way you want it to.

It's not convincing, it immediately outs you as a zealot, it's counterproductive in every single way. Why keep doing it?