There's some senior engineers on here who, in the face of AI changing the very structures this industry is built on, present themselves as Stewards of the Craft of Programming. Bugs the hell out for me. They keep alluding to the virtue of doing things by hand, the value of Good Code and of craftsmanship, saying that yes, AI might change some things, but hey it won't ever change the value of something done with proper care, by hand, just like in the olden days of 2024. Most everything that was Good back then is still Good now: deep knowledge of languages and systems, good code, great architecture. You know the sermon. And, yes, some of that *is* true. At least I think so. But we don't know, because no one truly knows what will be important in the future. We're going through times of great change and I think the best advice to give to young people and others who want to have a job and provide value is: keep your eyes open, rethink from first principles, derive from what businesses value what you can provide; the digital world is more malleable than ever, you should rethink how you can help shape it. All this pounding on the Bible of Good Code seems to me to be doing the opposite: it lets people feel comfortable -- what I've valued all my life is still valuable, I can rest easy -- in times when one shouldn't feel comfortable. This is a bumpy, exciting, strange ride. If you lean back you might fall off the waggon. Let's not delude ourselves and others that we can keep doing what we've been doing. Rethink it all. And, like I said, it bugs the hell out of me seeing senior engineers (that are secure in their career) talking as if there's nothing *really* to change, because the Fundamentals will still be valued. They might! But it's the wrong advice to not rethink everything right now.

It uses the Claude Agent SDK as mentioned in our news post. Anthropic's policy update from 2 days ago, in my reading, reaffirms that Claude Agent SDK usage and third-party apps are allowed to use your subscription limits: And then multiple Anthropic employees confirmed this on HN: And: many other products are using the Claude Agent SDK in this way openly, and the policy clarification and the Anthropic employee comments are all about allowing the continued use and nothing against that use. If I've misunderstood, let me know.

Building software in anything other than @AmpCode orbs feels like eating broken glass in comparison. But it’s frustratingly one of those “you can’t understand why it’s better until you just use it” tools, a lot like Tailwind was. Use it, and be ruined.

Opus 5.5 might be better than Sol 6.1. Maybe. But I will say that I'm more productive with Sol 6.1 + @AmpCode than with Opus 5.5 alone. 🤷‍♂️ I can swap models and not notice the difference. If I swap out Amp, I'm in pain.

i think @AmpCode is the first agent harness that I am comfortable sharing with my non-technical wife i dont get why anyone would use a replit/lovable over this. this is a huge market they can completely take over

Transitioned my Omega dev work to the cloud this afternoon. Local was getting cumbersome with workspaces and multiple agents. Tried Claude and @AmpCode. Stuck with Amp because it was able to help me get my workspace scripted and working well - Claude was close but I just kept hitting random snags. I’m working across 5 repos at once and need to make cross-cutting changes to several of them pretty often and Orbs seems a bit smarter and less locked down. Feels more like having an actual computer in the cloud vs. a restricted sandbox.

Imagine the collective hours lost to reading AI-generated Slack messages, PRDs, and slide decks. @thorstenball and @sqs discuss how AI can meaningfully accelerate product development -- just not by bolting it onto old rituals and processes.

I don't think writing a spec and splitting it into tickets is how you should use agents since Sol 5.6/Opus 5. Just tell the agent what you want to do and it will do it. If the task is large, discuss with the agent how to split it in several shippable PRs and do it one at a time.