It’s the psychological effect of a Mormon mission. Spend two years getting hate from all angles, teaching you just how good your home, family, and church are. Every ex-mormon I know contemplated suicide on their mission. Every practicing Mormon I know has a story about “their lowest point” and how actually it was a really really good thing if you think about it sideways

Yeah a typo in the subtitle does not especially inspire confidence

you've got me. What's the typo?

It seems to me there is a word or two missing between “rich” and “slowly”. If I read the whole thing aloud I cannot parse it into a sentence. Or the word “rich” could be removed. That would be clunky but at least grammatically sensible.

“Make data get smoothed out” is a very strange way of saying “smooths out data”

Who are the hackers?

So many people make so much money from it. I don’t personally this time but I did last time working for tech. Maybe I will again next time. This is the third time America been “humiliated” in my life and my life is awesome and getting better.

/s

But that is the overall sentiment if I had to describe it without pretense

Who are the hackers?

I think about how a successful and robust ecosystem is one in which there are many parasites at every level of the food chain. If your ecosystem doesn’t have parasites then it’s not operating with nearly the amount of interconnectedness or efficiency that it could be otherwise.

It’s similar to that idea that floats around where $0 lost to fraud is not the optimal amount. If you over index on removing fraud from your system eventually you will spend more on monitoring and removing it than you save on the fraud itself. That is time you could have spent building more things that make money.

The ecosystem is a beast of its own and the optimal state of the ecosystem is /not/the optimal state for any actor within it

You mean like visas, readily available from AUS to the EU?

From EU and EEA to Australia.

So we can get out

Citizen track

Sounds like a typo you are overanalyzing. I bet the second number was supposed to be 80%.

I don't think it's overanalyzing to point out a typo.

You just brought me back to my first internship where as interns we were asked to hand-manipulate a 30k lines auto-generated SOAP API definition because we lost the license to the software that generated it

Most art forms do not have a wildly changing landscape of materials and mediums. In software we are seeing things slow down in terms of tooling changes because the value provided by computers is becoming more clear and less reliant on specific technologies.

I figure that all this AI coding might free us from NIH syndrome and reinventing relational databases for the 10th time, etc.

LLMs are very much NIH machines

i'd go one step further, they're going to turbo charge the NIH syndrome and treat every code file as a seperate "here"

For others like me who know “NIH” to be “National Institutes of Health”…

“NIH” here refers to “Not Invented Here” Syndrome, or a bias against things developed externally.

Basically not wanting to use dependencies or frameworks from outside the company or team.

See I thought they were the same thing, considering the Queensland Health payroll database issues, I assumed someone coined the term assuming it would clobber Health acronyms.

Yeah it’s gonna make the bar for good enough here super easy to meet and people will have less reasons to look around outside

The bar to create the new X framework has just been lowered so I expect the opposite, even more churn.

All frameworks make some assumptions and therefore have some constraints. There was always a well-understood trade-off when using frameworks of speeding up early development but slowing down later development as the system encountered the constraints.

LLMs remove the time problem (to an extent) and have more problems around understanding the constraints imposed by the framework. The trade-off is less worth it now.

I have stopped using frameworks completely when writing systems with an LLM. I always tell it to use the base language with as few dependencies as possible.

If you are doing js, that makes sense since all the frameworks are a mess anyway.

Yes but no AI will know how to use your new framework so it will not get adopted

This was one of my predictions in https://thomshutt.com/2026/03/17/predictions/ - fiddling around with creating new languages and lower level tooling becomes less rewarding versus figuring out what we can get agents to build on top of the existing ones

I was trying to articulate to myself why calling it champagne feels like self-deception. And the reason is that to a SE all software is broken, buggy, slow, incomplete, has the wrong feature set, and is not extensible. To us software gets shipped when it stops giving us cold sweats.

For a PM to assume that the product ever becomes champagne feels very naive.

Champagne also explodes if you shake it too much :-).