I don't think this "effort" argument for technical knowledge pieces makes sense to me. If there is something I need, I do some research and I look for signals of authoritative information. I don't really care about how much effort it takes to write a blog post.

If you recieve any recruiter inbound, I would take their meeting and then let them know your goal of getting placed at whatever type of role youre looking for.

Because truly the answer boils down to "it depends" and many people will take it many different ways and not be "wrong". Publishing anonymously is a good choice, publishing publically and complying with a removal order is a good choice, not publishing is a good choice.

"Good" here being somewhat sound in that it likely wont cause the person publishing a huge life changing issue.

So yes, I think they will be able to turn a profit by charging more for the experience. Which is a humanless car.

Specifically, having agent implementation drift from the Spec.

I understand wanting to get things out ASAP. but two weeks is not the end of the world to wait as a consumer of professional software packages.

EDIT: I should actually click the link, not just read the title. Rip.

"I love that AI has taken all the creative and art jobs, so that we humans can work in the coal mines."

---

Obviously its nice that a person can make a movie or movie prototype on their own, with their own setup without needing a million dollars. But like you could also get a video camera and some friends and make a one room movie that tells a compelling story. At the end of the day, the audience wants a compelling story, and when I feel it comes from AI. I just... can't be compelled. Maybe I am out of touch.

However I have a pressing question, why should anyone trust this. I understand the process of self talk with claude can be useful for your own understanding. But this is a published result and is only really good when you've distilled it. Ideally you did real testing on it for validation.

The feeling I get from reading these articles, is "Well maybe this is true, but I don't know if I can trust it, so should I go and read a textbook?" If the goal is to distill learning here into something digestible for the reader. Then you as the author should provide proof that the statements are correct for me as the reader. I can't really tell from what's written here if you did that or not. If its just a bunch of generated articles which were useful for you in making, but for me as a reader I don't know if I get any value from them.

A common retort to this idea, is "Why should we trust anything a person says, people can be wrong too." However we typically would look for "proof of work" which AI really sidesteps here

If you are moonlighting durign the batch or after the batch and taking a job in the same industry, of course there are major concerns for your current founded company. Its extremely messy. In that specific situation you would need to be clear about your hours of work, separate computers, and a whole host of problems for the legal answer.

You potentially could be found personally liable as well if you are a founder of the company and putting your company at undue and known legal risk by taking another job in a related field which can have a claim over the company's IP.