The Bitcoin mining network is somewhere around 1000 EH/s, while the (AI assisted research ahead) 34.5 million H100-equivalent GPUs globally would yield about 0.435 EH/s. They'd represent less than 0.05% of the Bitcoin network.

Use whatever language works well for you and the task at hand, but many enjoy fullstack JS/TS.

The upside is that agent subtasks can be load balanced among servers, tasks won't be dropped if the process is killed, and better observability comes along with it.

The downside is definitely complexity. I'm having a hard time planning out an architecture that doesn't significantly increase the complexity of my agent code.

  Location: Wisconsin, US
  Remote: Yes
  Willing to relocate: No
  Technologies: TypeScript, Node.js, React, Express, ESLint, PostgreSQL, AI Prompting / Agents, Solidity, HTML, CSS (Sass, Panda), etc.
  Resume: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1AMqjgI_QkUnq8hbydyUC87D2-Duvlvif/view?usp=drivesdk
  Email: trevinhofmann@gmail.com

My focus has been full-stack web development for complex apps, but I love learning and would be open to considering other Engineering areas for the right company.

Best,

Trevin Hofmann

[1] https://github.com/cybersemics/em/wiki/Docs

https://github.com/cybersemics/em/

"em is a beautiful, minimalistic note-taking app for personal sensemaking."

It was in the works for about a year, and I'm now trying to find ways to make it more marketable and useful.

The three main things I'm working on are:

1. GitLab support (GitHub only at the moment) 2. A demo on the landing page that doesn't require any sign-up. 3. Better "vibe coding" experience through the Chat interface for those who want it.

I built it with TypeScript on the front- and back-end, React, Node.js, and PostgreSQL. And I over-engineeres it, as one does, with a Redis cache and websockets to push the latest data to web clients so the latest info is always shown without needing to refresh. I'm using the OpenAI API right now, but I want to switch to local models when I can invest in the hardware for it.

Edit: https://mysticode.ai - Would absolutely love feedback.

For Early Access, I started with a LinkedIn post, reaching out to close colleagues, commenting in relevant Slack groups/channels, and introducing it to some of my better freelance clients. I'll be signing up 2 more of the freelance clients shortly, with one key feature request from each first. It's important not to get stuck in the trap of developing one-off features to get each new user, but these are features that would be broadly beneficial.

Soon, I'm planning to add a super-simple demo at the top of the landing page to increase conversions, and then I'll start promoting it more. Likely also some relevant informational content marketing on a blog.

* setting small, clear objectives

* spending enough time on refactoring

* giving myself a small reward for completing objectives

* automating more of my repetitive tasks

  my $baz = GetFoo()
    |> GetBar
    |> GetBaz;

In that case, you can have a merge request with a commit to add a test and then another commit to fix it. As long as both commits build, bisect will still work.

I agree with having CI enforce both passing tests and working builds, but why would you want the build step to require passing tests?

[1] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=10154527

[2] https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=20420209