I have frequently been called a 10x developer by peers. I have written assembly ISRs for wireless firmware. I do full stack development. I’ve reverse engineered proprietary network protocols from dead products for use in specialized communication software. I’ve started a company that’s still running years after I got bored and left. I’ve been hired to start new software departments at companies. I’ve soldered complex electronics together and sold them to companies. At this point I’ve forgotten more interesting projects than I remember. I am very professionally competent.
Probably a 5/10 on HN though. Walter Bright and Alan Kay post here sometimes, and you can’t compete with that.
I’m not trying to brag. I’m trying to establish that I’m not new to development.
AI needs a different architecture and completely changes how to write code that scales well. AI changes what good code looks like because it changes the cost of writing code of a specific quality level altogether.
If you are having trouble scaling software development with AI, you need to rethink your software architecture. The more locked in you are to an existing architecture that is not aligned with AI driven development and the less autonomy you have to experiment with new architectures, the more trouble you are going to have.
I have PMs doing reliable and high quality frontend development. We now have a substantial number of new tests at the architecture level. All new backend work is in go. I’ve always disliked go as I felt it looks down on ICs, but it’s a great language when you genuinely don’t trust the developers and want to enforce best practices.
It wasn’t perfect, but we genuinely made AI driven development work with Opus’s level of intelligence. Some issues, but they were everyday annoyances, not a failure to operate at 5 to 10x team productivity levels.
Astra just took that working process and made it 2 to 3x more productive, solving every challenge we were having. It’s nuts.
I haven't used Astra or Fable much. It's because Opus 4.8 is doing everything I need and I feel confident in using it. Why fix what's not broken? The model isn't the limiting factor for me right now.
I just wrote about my process [1] and I fully agree that the more tied you are to existing approaches to software engineering the more trouble you will have.
It might be super interesting if you could elaborate on what you're doing differently with Asta. Are you reviewing generated code? Are PRs being reviewed? Are you more of a orchestrator? etc
Comments
I have frequently been called a 10x developer by peers. I have written assembly ISRs for wireless firmware. I do full stack development. I’ve reverse engineered proprietary network protocols from dead products for use in specialized communication software. I’ve started a company that’s still running years after I got bored and left. I’ve been hired to start new software departments at companies. I’ve soldered complex electronics together and sold them to companies. At this point I’ve forgotten more interesting projects than I remember. I am very professionally competent.
Probably a 5/10 on HN though. Walter Bright and Alan Kay post here sometimes, and you can’t compete with that.
I’m not trying to brag. I’m trying to establish that I’m not new to development.
AI needs a different architecture and completely changes how to write code that scales well. AI changes what good code looks like because it changes the cost of writing code of a specific quality level altogether.
If you are having trouble scaling software development with AI, you need to rethink your software architecture. The more locked in you are to an existing architecture that is not aligned with AI driven development and the less autonomy you have to experiment with new architectures, the more trouble you are going to have.
I have PMs doing reliable and high quality frontend development. We now have a substantial number of new tests at the architecture level. All new backend work is in go. I’ve always disliked go as I felt it looks down on ICs, but it’s a great language when you genuinely don’t trust the developers and want to enforce best practices.
It wasn’t perfect, but we genuinely made AI driven development work with Opus’s level of intelligence. Some issues, but they were everyday annoyances, not a failure to operate at 5 to 10x team productivity levels.
Astra just took that working process and made it 2 to 3x more productive, solving every challenge we were having. It’s nuts.
I haven't used Astra or Fable much. It's because Opus 4.8 is doing everything I need and I feel confident in using it. Why fix what's not broken? The model isn't the limiting factor for me right now.
I just wrote about my process [1] and I fully agree that the more tied you are to existing approaches to software engineering the more trouble you will have.
[1] https://jaisenmathai.com/articles/sojourn-for-ios-was-45-one...
It might be super interesting if you could elaborate on what you're doing differently with Asta. Are you reviewing generated code? Are PRs being reviewed? Are you more of a orchestrator? etc