In the age of generative models, the most important skill for a developer is to be able to recognize the shape of the problem and pick the correct way to express it. What's relevant today is the ability to do high level reasoning about algorithms, data structures, and data flows within the system. Imperative programming is quickly becoming akin to writing assembly because language models are quite competent at writing code in the small, while they stumble at high level design and architecture. So it is good to learn a language that operates at a higher level, such as Clojure, which is data-centric, composes functions declaratively, and keeps code close to the shape of the problem.

Just yesterday, someone asked me why Clojure. This article is exactly the answer I wish I’d had. But more importantly, I think the first paragraph summarises my view on working with large language models. The complexity of a project still has to be managed by the engineer, since LLMs struggle to reason consistently about entire systems. The most important skill in software engineering is no longer coding itself, but finding smarter ways to manage complexity when designing solutions and architecting systems.

People capable of liking some paintings or prints or whatever can rarely do so without knowing something about the artist. Again, the situation is social rather than scientific. Any work of art is half of a conversation between two human beings, and it helps a lot to know who is talking at you. Does he or she have a reputation for seriousness, for religiosity, for suffering, for concupiscence, for rebellion, for sincerity, for jokes?

Here is Kurt Vonnegut telling his brother to show his experimental art in public and to use his face, because “pictures are famous for their humanness, and not for their pictureness”.

Frequently, when I open a book for the first time, I encounter a new author. I need to know something about them: where and when they lived, what they looked like, what they did besides writing, and what else they wrote. I need to have an idea of the kind of person who is going to tell me a story, because understanding a book often requires me to ask why the author wrote it. What was their purpose?

It’s a bit the same when I read an article on a blog or look at an open-source project. I want to know the human behind it and read something brief about the author.

The fear is being found out for being imperfect. The fear is also for being known in general: maybe you're a real butch tough guy but your art style is playful and tender and you don't want that side to come out. Maybe your taste is weird or undeveloped and you don't want anyone to know. But the person who puts nothing out for judgment just isn't known at all.

Tom is right. At a time when the internet is filling up with artificial content, it is even more important to put ourselves out there rather than remain anonymous. Show that you are real, and give others a reason to trust you before asking for their attention.

I decided to add a new section for short notes that don’t deserve an entire post.

I’ll mostly use it to share thoughts and interesting links, the kind of content that usually works well on social media. Since I don’t use socials much, I’d rather save those things here, where I have full control over them.

I’ve also updated the RSS feed page, splitting the content into multiple feeds. I’ll add a new one that includes these notes as well, for the most devoted readers.