Today I shared some personal practice use cases (for research and maintaining open-source) of Claude Code at
@BerkeleySky, UC Berkeley.
Here is the link to the presentation:
Some personal hot takes/ discussion conclusions:
1. IDEs might not be the eventual best way to interact with code. CLI-based agents require less human supervision and scale better (compared to tools like Cursor). People may eventually only review the PR rather than the intermediate coding steps (even more aggressive!).
2. Whether a problem can be solved (the boundary!) by coding agents (today) largely depends on whether there is a clear signal for the task. For example,
@karpathy’s autosearch is relatively easy because the signal is clean, a very good example.
(Good news for researchers: coding agents still struggle with open-ended questions. So… our jobs are probably safe for a little while.)
3. Human supervision is the bottleneck. Designing agent products that minimize human effort while leveraging humans’ advantage in context switching is a very interesting direction.