I agree somewhat. An example might be a .md file describing a UI for commonly used tool that is invoked whenever you reference it. This could be a stripped down version of a complex UI for some software that has a lot of different uses (like 3D modeling programs and image editors) allowing the user to focus on the subset of work they do with it.

> Just think about the complexity of localization and how many IFs you had to write to solve different language versions, etc. in the old PHP code. A lot of that complexity can simply disappear.

IFs! Oh no! Throwing all of this into a non-deterministic and expensive black box is making it less complex, you say?

this exactly the future we are working towards as well. You should checkout AppLess http://github.com/thesysdev/appless

Great link, I haven't seen that before. I saw someone at Microsoft make an "OS" that was just copilot chats per-window, generating the HTML. I recreated it and it's not great, but it's a fun toy that _feels_ transformative, unlike almost every AI product ever made besides the fundamental chat interface.

To take this a step further: https://chatjimmy.ai/

Imagine AppLess running a model as good as qwen at 20,000 tok/sec. It would be generated in a shorter amount of time as downloading a webpage right now. If this works out the consequences are kind of scary. The end of SaaS, the end of software being the moat or the property of companies, the embolstering of data protection (since that's fundamentally what code operates)...

Exciting times indeed

How do you reconcile ...

> I hate when UI teams constantly redesign perfectly fine software

... with ...

> Having the UI layer completely abstracted from pre-written code and dynamically generated "on the fly" based on the context of the user is, I believe, the future

In this scenario there's still no guarantee that the UI won't randomly change. There's no guarantee that the ui generated for the user will be the same visit to visit.

Just guessing, Czechia? The Central European software engineering market seems to be softening as well, likely due to second-order effects from the U.S. tech layoffs and decreased demand for remote roles from SV companies.

No, he's in Switzerland. Unexpectedly, I must say, as many big tech including AI labs are expanding here

I fear when someone says which country you are so fast lol.

Move fast and break things.

Are they, though? My thinking is that their roadmap is heavily focused on the SDLC and solving problems related to software development, so their model will be optimized for that domain. That leaves room in the market for models that are specialized in other areas of expertise.

Agree. I'm building a software factory at my job right now that leverages Claude Code. It seems like almost daily Anthropic is releasing new products or features on existing products that seem to overlap with the factory I'm building. I still think my project provides a more coherent workflow from a SDLC standpoint, bringing an idea to a ticket, to a prompt, to a plan, and finally coding and creating a PR, but it definitely feels like Anthropic is heading in that direction as well. It'll be interesting if they eventually bring all of this together into a single uber tool.

If that is what they are optimizing for, then they are not doing a great job on that either. Their latest model is more expensive and less impressive, their downtime is abysmal by any comparison, their "Dispatch" product is unworkable - conversation threads don't sync properly, the UX is quite bad -, their Desktop app is slow and clunky, Cowork is by all accounts mediocre.

These decisions always depend on the lifecycle of the product. I assume that at Basecamp’s level of maturity, where it has reached a certain saturation point and growth and usage are fairly predictable, it makes perfect sense to make a strategic decision like this and commit to a long-term bet.

Regardless, kudos to DHH and team for being so vocal about it, it's a great case study for product teams in similar lifecycle.

This is a bit of a puzzling "announcement". Does anyone have more details on what’s actually changing?

I don’t really use Facebook itself anymore, I’ve mostly kept Messenger for messaging. Curious whether this is an attempt to push users back toward the main feed experience.

No insider info but this seems like two teams combined and one of their (redundant) products got shuttered. Not a typical "shutdown" announcement for a service since it was (AFAIK) just a different interface for the same underlying feature, accessible elsewhere.

The article is surprisingly missing the most important part: a cost comparison. I understand and share the frustration with rising prices and ads creeping into paid plans, but for people who value optionality and broad access, streaming is still meaningfully cheaper than owning content.

In many cases, the price of a single movie is comparable to an entire month of a streaming service, which gives access to thousands of titles. Ownership can make sense if you repeatedly watch a small, fixed catalog over many years, but for most casual or exploratory viewing, the economics still favor streaming.

Fair enough! However you need to consider:

- Depending on your taste you will need to subscribe to multiple servics. Shows / movies I enjoy are scattered across Netflix, AppleTV+, Prime, Disney+. And it's increasingly unlikely that IP is licensed out (i.e. no Star Wars on Netflix)

- There is a surprising amount of movies which are not on any streaming service (at least in Germany) OR they are but you still need to buy a digital copy or rent

- The UX of self hosted solutions like for example Jellyfin or other open source can (surprisingly!) be better than the paid solutions. I.e. no ads & and no UX redesigns

I'm not opposed to streaming services at all. I will subscribe to them as long as it's value for money.

However in recent years streaming services got worse while self hosted solutions got much much better.

Your point - subscription is cheaper than self hosting - may still hold, but the balance has definitely shifted in favor of self hosted solution.

I don't think it'll become mainstream in the near future (or ever) but for me personally it's worth it!

It's also not "either / or". You can both self-host and have subscriptions, but maybe you can cut down on some subscription services:)

Some people do not mind buying art or paying artists for their work.

If we assume an artist gets 1¢ per stream of a song, and that album is 10 songs long, you need to listen to it 100x for the artist to get the same as just buying a $10 CD from Bandcamp.

I understand this example is missing the cuts given to other parties (label, etc) but it is still more to the artist than streaming unless you obsessively stream the same albums repeatedly.

Spotify is cheaper because your favorite local indie band makes far less from it.

Additionally, thrift stores have loads of CDs you can rip for extremely cheap.

Spotify pays me about $0.003 per stream. That's pretty typical for every artist on the site.

For the most part, you aren't meaningfully paying for content when you use streaming services. This has the effect of making it not cost effective to produce good content you enjoy, while still costing you money to pay for the services, most of that money being funneled towards slop and execs. The ecosystem as a whole would benefit if you set aside the money you would ordinarily pay for streaming, and instead spent it on choice works you appreciate, while downloading whatever you like.

For movies specifically, you should consider paying substantially more than you would on streaming if you watch any substantial amount of movies. It is very hard to fund good movies with only streaming revenue.

Can we remove this? While this war is a horrible tragedy, I’m of that opinion that we should not discuss geopolitics on this site unless it’s directly impacting the core topics we are all here for.

Mind sharing a link? That sounds really interesting!

It’s too soon to know, but this could make 3-year H-1B renewals hugely problematic. That would be a major blow to the program. I was fortunate to get mine in 2014 without a single problem. There’s no way I’d expect someone to get through this process today. And realistically, most companies aren’t going to pay such a large premium just for a typical software engineer.

> And realistically, most companies aren’t going to pay such a large premium just for a typical software engineer.

This is the point, I think (whether I agree or not)

"Hire locally!" as a catch phrase wasn't working.

Then probably just more outsourcing? Which again, maybe the point is more to keep people from coming here and less to help American workers?

If the job was easy to effectively outsource, it would have been much cheaper for hiring organizations to outsource years ago rather than bring employees in on H-1Bs before this announcement.

> most companies aren’t going to pay such a large premium just for a typical software engineer.

Isn't that the idea tho? Stop companies abusing the h1b for "regular" staff? It's supposed to be for talent you can't find locally. So "exceptional" would fit, no?

(outsider perspective, eu here).