The best kind of programming is not when you get a lot done, but when you painstakingly spend extra time to arrive at something so simple and elegant that it ironically looks effortless and not worthy of any special regard.
I wonder if the same people who never read code also never read their agent skills and configs, and end up with bigger and bigger mess that probably works worse than if they just removed all of it.
5% AI failure rate can feel worse than 20% human one. I think it's because the failures don't overlap.
For humans it feels extra super bad to see an AI fail where you wouldn't have.
Extra super duper bad when talking about self-driving cars.
Adding features (and complexity) makes your program less appealing, not more.
Software systems exist to solve a problem. Anything that's not laser-focused on the solution is an annoyance, and building that cruft is worse than money down a hole. It can lose us customers.
AI,
One of the biggest insights I've picked up later in life: everything you own owns you back. It takes maintenance, and mental space. The more complex and obscure it is, the more it owns you. This is just as true of the software we build, especially now.