I predict it's going to be a bloodbath. People who worked for Big Tech have no idea what's coming. Some of us software engineers who have been outside have been experiencing issues for almost a decade. The industry is extremely anti-competitive.

Whatever you produce, nobody is going to use unless you produce it under the banner of Big Tech. There are no real opportunities for real founders.

The problem is spreading beyond software. The other day, I found out there is a billion dollar company whose main product is a sponge... Yes, a sponge, for cleaning. We're fast moving towards a communist-like centrally planned economy, but with a facade of meritocracy where there is only one product of each kind and no room for competition.

This feeling of doom that software engineers started to feel after LLMs is how I was feeling 5 years earlier. People are confused because they think the problem is that AI is automating them but reality is that our problems arise from a deeper systemic issue at the core of our economic system. AI is just a convenient cover story, it's not the reason why we are doomed. Once people accept that we can start to work towards a political solution like UBI or better...

We've reached the conclusion of Goodhart's Law "When a measure becomes a target, it ceases to be a good measure" - Our economic system has been so heavily monitored and controlled in every aspect that is has begun to fail in every aspect. Somebody has managed to profit from every blindspot, every exploit exposed by the measurement and control apparatus. Everything is getting qualitatively worse in every way that is not explicitly measured and the measurement apparatus is becoming increasingly unreliable... Most problems we're experiencing are what people experienced during the fall of communism except filter bubbles are making us completely blind to the experience of other people.

I think if we don't address the root causes, things will get worse for everyone. People's problems will get bigger, become highly personalized, pervasive, inexplicable, unrelatable. Everyone will waste their energy trying to resolve their own experience of the symptoms but the root causes would remain.

Making music with AI is a new hobby of mine.

My journey started after my wife found a Ukulele on the side of the road near where I lived a few years ago and took it home. Then often when I had a short break, I started just tugging at strings, trying to fully internalize the sound of each note and how they relate... After a few months, I learned about Suno and I started uploading short tunes and made full songs out of them. I basically produced a couple of new songs each week and my Ukulele playing got a lot better and I can now do custom chords. I'm all self taught so I literally don't know any of the formal rules of music. I shun all the theory about chords and composition like chorus, bridge, outro... I just give the AI the full text and so long as the main tune is repeated enough times with appropriate variations, I'm fine with it.

TBH, as a software engineer, I was a bit surprised at how rigid music is. Isn't it supposed to be creative? Rules stand in the way of that. I try to focus purely on what sounds good. For me, even the lyrics are just about the sound of the voice, I don't really care what they say, so long as it makes a vague general statement (with multiple interpretations) and not cheesy in any way.

Sure, but the world is vast. I would love to be able to test every UI framework and figure out which is the best, but who’s got time for that? You have to rely on heuristics for some things, and popularity is often a decent indicator.

Popularity’s flip side is that it can fuel commodification.

I argue popularity is insufficient signal. React as tech is fine, but the market of devs who it is aimed at may not be the most discerning when it comes to quality.

> Look at the typical React dev. They have zero leverage and can be replaced by vibe coding kiddies straight out of school or sourced from literally any company on earth.

Good luck maintaining such code. As we know from constant whining here on HN ("Hooks are too complicated..." "I don't understand useEffect"), React's model feels slightly more complex than other frameworks' models.

I can even argue that the more popular React is, the more React developers are needed.

We haven't yet lost the war against complexity. We would know if we had, because all software would grind to a halt due to errors. We're getting close though; some aspects of software feels deeply dysfunctional; like 2FA and Captcha - They're perfect examples of trying to improve something (security) by adding complexity... And it fails spectacularly... It fails especially hard because those people who made the decision to force these additional hurdles on users are still convinced that they're useful because they have a severely distorted view of the average person's reality. Their trade-off analysis is completely out of whack.

The root problem with 2FA is that the average computer is full of vulnerabilities and cannot be trusted 100% so you need a second device just in case the computer was hacked... But it's not particularly useful because if someone infected your computer with a virus, they can likely also infect your phone the next time you plug it in to your computer to charge it... It's not quite 2-factor... So much hassle for so little security benefit... Especially for the average person who is not a Fortune 500 CEO. Company CEOs have a severely distorted view about how often the average person is targeted by scammers and hackers. Last time someone tried to scam me was 10 years ago... The pain of having to pull up my phone every single day, multiple times per day to type in a code is NOT WORTH the tiny amount of security it adds in my case.

The case of security is particularly pernicious because complexity has an adverse impact on security; so trying to improve security by adding yet more complexity is extremely unwise... Eventually the user loses access to the software altogether. E.g. they forgot their password because they were forced to use some weird characters as part of their password or they downloaded a fake password manager which turned out to be a virus, or they downloaded a legitimate password manager like Lastpass which was hacked because obviously, they'd be a popular target for hackers... Even if everything goes perfectly and the user is so deeply conditioned that they don't mind using a password manager... Their computer may crash one day and they may lose access to all their passwords... Or the company may require them to change their password after 6 month and the password manager misses the update and doesn't know the new password and the user isn't 'approved' to use the 'forgot my password' feature... Or the user forgets their password manager's master password and when they try to recover it via their email, they realize that the password for their email account is inside the password manager... It's INFURIATING!!!

I could probably write the world's most annoying book just listing out all the cascading layers of issues that modern software suffers from. The chapter on security alone would be longer than the entire Lord of the Rings series... And the average reader would probably rather throw themselves into the fiery pits of Mordor than finish reading that chapter... Yet for some bizarre reason, they don't seem to mind EXPERIENCING these exact same cascading failures in their real day-to-day life.

If you read that Wirth 1995 paper (A Plea for Lean Software) referenced by the OP, following paragraphs answered your question:

“ To some, complexity equals power

A system’s ease of use always should be a primary goal, but that ease should be based on an underlying concept that makes the use almost intuitive. Increasingly, people seem to misinterpret complexity as sophistication, which is baffling — the incomprehensible should cause suspicion rather than admiration.

Possibly this trend results from a mistaken belief that using a somewhat mysterious device confers an aura of power on the user. (What it does confer is a feeling of helplessness, if not impotence.) Therefore, the lure of complexity as sale incentive is easily understood; complexity promotes customer dependence on the vendor.”

I am typing (no screenshots or copy and paste) this 30 year old wisdom in to reply here as an archived reminder for myself.

I know competent adults whose login flow for most websites is “forgot password.” Might be better off writing your passwords on post it notes at that point.

I've seen a few sites where the login flow is simply entering your email address and you get a time-limited login link sent to you. You never create any password at all. I was skeptical at first but I've found it seems to work pretty decently.

This could not be a more picture perfect example of a Wirth-suboptimal engeneering decision as per the article if it were designed for that. The amount of slowdown to run to the emails, wait for reception, open, copy, paste instead of using the sensible flow of password manager integration is huge. But people will use wasteful processes if they just don't need to change them, so what are you gonna do?

well, yeah, I mean a local 2fa code app (or integrated passwd manager as you say) is definitely simpler. the "just enter an email and paste in the code you got emailed" is the most foolproof because people don't lose access to their email nearly as often as they lose their phone (2fa app) or forget their password. /shrug

Whenever some website asks me to use specific weird characters in my password. I have to write it down on a post-it note and put it in the top drawer of my desk.

The irony is that the websites which require such passwords are often low-importance.

Or better; write your software such that you can scale to tens of thousands of concurrent users on a single machine. This can really put the savings into perspective.

If you were to read TFA, it is about ML training workloads, not web servers

Well the article starts out with a suggestion that we should all get a data center... It's quite a jump to assume that everyone reading this article needs to train their own LLMs.

Whenever a government offers loans at an interest rate which is below the risk premium, that difference essentially represents the government giving the borrower free money paid for by all citizens through loss of buying power.

So when Japan offered 0% interest loans to traders who used it to buy USD bonds, it represents the Japan government offloading the cost of the risk premium to its citizens and giving the difference to the traders for free... But then the traders give that free money to the US government where it helps to inflate the USD currency supply to make American asset-holders richer.

The traders aren't actually profiting from the carry trade because the 4% return on US bonds doesn't cover the real inflation (loss of buying power) of the US dollar; their net worth in terms of buying power is actually the same or dropping. US asset holders are the ones actually reaping the benefit.

Japan is interesting because it has the highest debt-to-GDP ratio of any developed country and most other countries in the world are increasing their debt-to-GDP ratio; in effect, they're all moving towards a Japanese reality due to the fiat system's lack of hard monetary constraints.

If you look at Japan, the aspects of its economy and society which stand out the most are:

- Rigid economic structure and processes.

- Economy dominated by huge corporations, without much room for startups.

- Highly concentrated urban population.

- Population decline. Many young people are not dating and not getting married, can't afford much on their salaries working in the city.

This is like communism in the sense that it's sold as one thing, but serves another purpose for a different set of people than those it was marketed to.

Having worked as a software engineer in the industry for almost 15 years, my experience is that the leading (elite) proponents of this philosophy don't really care about tech or innovation; they only care to the extent that they control the innovation.

Any innovation created outside of their sphere of control will be ignored and suppressed (as best as possible). It's ironic because this is how they view China's tech sector. I remember reading an article about DeepSeek and the author made a comment about how it was developed independently of government by a relatively small company and how unusual this is for China; surprised that they were able to build without the blessing of the CCP... But the US works the same way! Except instead of the CCP, the power is called Big VC.

Anyway this is the past 20 years or so. I'm skeptical of this model. I'm quite sure, as a tech guy, I would do better in a strict hard-money capitalist system, even if I just did software as a side project. Right now it's just too centralized and monopolized and there are perverse incentives keeping everything locked in. It used to be that a 10x solution could get you noticed, now nothing will get you noticed besides the right technocratic pedigree.

"Every accusation is a confession" they say