Видео

Large companies fire thousands regularly. And some of them even called it a mistake. But yes, individuals get more productive.. as usual.

@@JohnMcclanedmy advise is to not any LLM at all while learning a new language and also write out all code by yourself (only copy paste alllowed is of your own code). Once you master your language/platform LLMs are fine and can improve your performance (but be vary of hard to spot bugs)

Which one in 60 years as ELIZA🤣. LLM's are vectorial databases with generative capabilities no more no less. BTW I am from the other side of madness what is know as weak AI... we never believed those crazy statements. However we enjoyed the spectacle as I told my friend bob "pass the popcorn, this is going to be quite interesting... many go in .. none come out"

Maybe.. but just knowing CS has never sufficed before either.

It does speed up prototypes or scripts massively, though.

@@FranklyDeveloping If you are doing quite simple things yes ... but if you need to think bare metal as in C ... it is a disaster

Are you referring to AGI, or do you believe that LLMs can be improved to become significantly stronger? 🤔

We all gonna be replaced and enslaved by AI 🙌

you're really sleeping on how much frosted flakes are going to revolutionize computer science. I mean, sure, they're not doing anything _now_ but you gotta think about what they'll be doing next month!

Yes, I expect a lot more startups due to AI.. but I still believe that the successful ones will then need developers again.

@@FranklyDeveloping going to need developers in ai to kill the other ai companies

No, they can't. They event can't articulate their problem/idea. Nor have analytical thinking. Programming is not only converting ideas into code. That's why the term software engineer was born. Everyone can build a house by themself, yet you have construction workers, electrician, plumber ...

There's no need to hate yourself for that. We can have different opinions after all.

@@FranklyDeveloping sorry man, ostrich effect and I hate to say it but you’ve buried your head in the dirt. I’m getting my masters in software engineering right now and though I’m sympathetic to your position, it’s avoidant.

Yeah.. just what I meant with prototyping. It does open our dev world to many more people.

"Actual AI".. depends on what you mean. The usual term is AGI, explained at the disclaimer part of the video. And that we definitely haven't reached at all yet.

@@FranklyDeveloping Yeah, that in its self seems a bit paradoxing and revailing that there is still some pages left on that chapter to be made. its one many topics I like to thought experiment with using my recently first successfully loaded and my own model I have generated. I have bin famillar and used some of Googles models now and then over the last 2-3 years. But the last 8 months I have bin very imerged with it only using open source and have learned a lot just not about actual coding from the ground and up but I am recognizing patterns here and there and consider a carrie adjustment adding what automation and the current possibilities they can help improving coming from a background with biologi fitness instructor and nutritionist/ nutrition structuring assistent for others I see great potential for improvements for streamlining alot of process as well as the ease of access to relevant information on the go. and my project in that context would have only bin at like a 3rd of the way without the Large Language models. But I also get what you are saying and I dont think you are wrong. More like a counter balance to the over hype it has at the moment

What point in particular do you think I got wrong?

Did you even watch the video? 😂

@@zilezia Yes I did, do you understand why I mentioned trajectories? The video was about the limitation of the state of the art with absolutely no reference to where things are heading. AI cannot replace programmers, that's true but as a programmer of 38 years who now works exclusively in AI, I'm extremely confident that AI will replace programmers in just about every corner of the industry. It's not going to happen this year or even this decade bit it will happen and it will happen completely.

@@74Gee You're right AI will not be even decent enough this year, or the near future.

@@zilezia it is already better than the vast majority of people in most fields. Have you even tried Claude 3.5 or even better OpenAI's o1 Preview? The second is much better than almost every developer maybe except the top 1% of humans which are the ones that drive progress in the field, the rest are already useless.

I hope so! Wouldn't want my videos to change the entre industry 🤣

Great summary and totally matches my experience. I'm working on the followup video where I will go into more details on these and similar points.

Yes, it's not advanced technique really, but we often get lost in the weeds and it helps to get back to these basics when one's stuck.

I've been working with many different languages, but these principles stay almost the same everywhere. Glad you liked it 🙏

@@FranklyDeveloping I haven't really seen this much IDE integration anywhere else than C# and java. That is a little bit different.

If it works for you, great! I think "small" doesn't need discussion and if someone notices a "large" then just discuss it. No need for story points really 🤷‍♂️

Thank you for the kind words 🙏 my approach is to simply try your best and embrace imperfection. There will always be situations where you end up with unwanted dependencies. It's not about avoiding them entirely, but being able to quickly address them.

Thanks for the feedback and glad you liked it 🙏

Absolutely! These are trade-offs you make when you need that kind of performance. But even though this is about a small game, I still wouldn't consider the menu to be in need of such massive speeds. And if one doesn't need that speed, it would be a bad deal.

If I recall correctly, this doesn't apply here at all. If a C# class isn't declared "sealed" AND doesn't inherit from other classes, all method calls get called via a vtable. There are only a couple specific cases in C# where a vtable isn't used. Point being, a switch with enum will not help because the "Update" method call is invoked via vtable no matter what

Thank you for the kind words 🙏 I'd say in this video there are still a few rough edges left. You can look forward to the next video, in which I'll show my approach to the final cleanups before doing a PR. Again, not perfect, but presentable to a maintainer.

Good points, though I prefer not to measure these things. Usually everyone on the team knows quite well when complexity is reaching that bad point. So I think the story points are not so much the means to detect the problem, but instead a possible, but maybe not the best, way to communicate it.

I grant you the maybe clickbaity.. but there is no need to test! The point of using the type system is that successful compilation is already a way stronger correctness than any automated test could give you (limited to what you can express in the types of course).

​@@FranklyDeveloping I'm sorry, and with respect, but I have to disagree with you. I wrote software professionally (mainly C) for 20 years. Proving that a function or program or system meets its requirement is what I mean by testing. If we take the old chestnut of a sort function, I don't see that a type system addresses typical bugs such as "out by one" on an integer (e.g. a loop count) that might leave an unsorted number at the end of the list. Easy enough to test - just give random input data and check it's all in order. I don't see how your type system addresses this kind of programming bug.

Nah.. we agree on that! As I said, you can only get as far as the type system supports. That means you can avoid some bugs, not all.

@@FranklyDevelopingI like static types but this is bullshit. No need to test? Type system gives stronger guarantees than any test? Crazy, very crazy

@@greyshopleskin2315 ever heard of lean? agda? idris? type systems can be so strong that you can prove correctness of just about anything. the main reason (I think) why this is not used widely is because it's optimized for proving mathematical theorems (which are expressed as types!), not proving real world applications. also, at this point, it would require tons of people to learn something rather complex and build parts of their infrastructure again from scratch (because obviously this is only useful if the libraries have stated and proven properties). and there's of course still no guarantee that the properties you encoded in the typesystem match the expectations of the actual users. but that's true of tests too.

If you mean messy as in many classes for combinatorial variants, then yes. What we usually do in those cases is something like the builder pattern to ensure invariants on the final objects only.

Yes of course. You may not always have the compiler to check it automatically, but a good API similarly tries to limit the number of invalid or inconsistent requests that can be possible. Less checking needed, less errors possible.

Makes me wonder what important concept you would learn there that helps with story points? 🤔

Indeed.. pretty much well known since the 70ies.. like most things development. But then again, some weren't even born at that time, so it's maybe worth repeating.

🙏

Thank you. I'm kind of surprised that people like this, but as they do, I already have a few more planned 👍

Happy for you! Well done 🤗

Thank you 🙏

That's the theory at least. I've never encountered a team that could keep them internal though. You still have to reason with stakeholders and if it works for you to base that discussion on storypoints without exposing them, awesome! Personally, I find that too hard and instead opt for the alternatives.

@@FranklyDeveloping I didnt get any alternative from that video. Not estimating? That's just chaos. How does that even work? You just pull a Blizzard and say it's done when it's done? How does that even fly with stakeholders? How would you know when a task spirals out of control, effor wise? I am curious about how this is supposed to work. From the video I only get some, imho. very weak excuses for not using Story Points but not really an alternative.

Also, how would you estimate costs for a customer without doing even some rough estimation? How woud you reprioritize tasks when you dont know if the effort / value ration is bad for a todo?

I've planned to make another video on this. But yes, not estimating is a controversial topic. I stopped doing it years ago and actually find it a lot less chaotic. That may not be true for everyone though.

There's something to a healthy amount of pressure, but your team should be in control of it preferably. No pressure and you'll go too lax, a little bit of pressure is fine, but if it's at the cost of quality/ burnout/ etc. it's too costly

Address the root cause: you should not be held accountable for someone else's estimate. And if you don't give an estimate, the discussion has to move to a more meaningful place. I think I'll do a video on how to argue these points soon 🤔

Back when I was a PO I would explicitly leave the discussion when story points or any other estimations was brought up. I told my teams that I just wanted an answer to the question: Is this goal achievable in the next sprint. If not, then we re-worked the goal. If yes, we're done. Planning is over. I didn't care how teams estimated whether or not a sprint goal was achievable, I just cared that they gave me an answer. My plannings usually lasted only 10-15 minutes because I always made sure to include investigations for future sprints as a part of the expected work which meant that when we moved into the next planning we already knew how to technically solve the next set of potential goals without having any boring refinement meetings.

@@JohnDoe-sq5nv But then the quality of the feature resides on if it could be done in a sprint, not whether or not it delivered what the customer actually desired (which could take longer)?

​@@magne6049 Depends. And this is also a place where Scrum itself breaks against reality and why it might not always be a suitable framework with its consistent sprints. Scrum states that every sprint should result in a potentially releasable increment, in practice that might not be possible but a scrum breaking work around is to simply communicate this to the stakeholders/customers and split the feature into as many steps as needed where the steps themselves at least provide value.

I got better with editing to a fast pace, so there aren't a lot of breaks now.. I guess you're right, the music isn't really needed anymore.

Not sure if it helps, but I tend to not think of these systems in terms of their structure (like you said regarding the different couplings) but instead focus on the cause- effect relations or constraints.

@@FranklyDeveloping Interesting. I tend to agree, but again - terminology! What do you see as different between a coupling and a cause-and-effect relationship?

Coupling has many interpretations, some are simply static. For example service A talking to service B. Cause and effect says more towards how such a coupling behaves. F.ex. a very bad coupling in which every change to service A needs a corresponding change to be made to service B.

Thank you. Glad you liked it.

Thank you 🙏

Too bad you didn't like it. I agree that it's not really containing new revelations, but I still think it's a great summary of where we're at as an industry.

@@FranklyDeveloping I don't think the internal logic holds together. Farley seems to be in the business of being famous rather than contributing value.

Interesting point, although I don't like going as far as making assumptions about his intentions. But that aside, would you mind sharing what exactly you think doesn't hold together?

@@FranklyDeveloping I think his anecdotal evidence is presented as proof. In some places he articulates that claims are only correlative but then his rhetoric makes it sound causative.

Hmm 🤔

Dhanyavad 🙏

Thank you 🙏 but no, I don't have an account.

​@@FranklyDeveloping I'm a simple man: I see a smart Chess metaphor, "I thumb up". If the next stuff turns out to involve blindfold Chess and Chess Boxing, it's gonna be wiild!

Chess Boxing with your project manager.. hmmmm 🤣

@@FranklyDevelopingAaaaand here we go. I know you can do it! Cheers!

What specifically are you wondering about?

Glad you like it. Thank you 🙏

@@FranklyDeveloping Thank you very mutch... have a nice Start of the week.... see you….

You're right. I had to upgrade my camera - try a newer video - it should be much better.

@@FranklyDeveloping haha nw, it's okay Good video overall 💯